Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27600512›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2016

Developing, delivering and evaluating primary mental health care: the co-production of a new complex intervention.

Joanne Reeve, Lucy Cooper, Sean Harrington, Peter Rosbottom, Jane Watkins

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Co-Creation Study Protocol for Developing a Nurse-Led Intervention to Deprescribe Benzodiazepines and Z-Hypnotics in Primary Care Aimed at Empowering Women.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Feeling blue, sad, or depressed: how to manage these patients.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2018
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Joanne ReeveWarwick Medical School, Warwick University, Coventry, CV4 7AL, UK. j.reeve.1@warwick.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-3184-7955
Lucy CooperDivision of Health Sciences Research, Liverpool University, Liverpool, L69 3GL, UK.
Sean HarringtonAiW Health, 38-44 Woodside Business Park, Birkenhead, Wirral, CH41 1EL, UK.
Peter RosbottomAiW Health, 38-44 Woodside Business Park, Birkenhead, Wirral, CH41 1EL, UK.
Jane WatkinsAiW Health, 38-44 Woodside Business Park, Birkenhead, Wirral, CH41 1EL, UK.

Funding

Department of Health NIHR/CS/009/013Department of Health [UK] 2532287
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealth services face the challenges created by complex problems, and so need complex intervention solutions. However they also experience ongoing difficulties in translating findings from research in this area in to quality improvement changes on the ground. BounceBack was a service development innovation project which sought to examine this issue through the implementation and evaluation in a primary care setting of a novel complex intervention.

methodsThe project was a collaboration between a local mental health charity, an academic unit, and GP practices. The aim was to translate the charity's model of care into practice-based evidence describing delivery and impact. Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) was used to support the implementation of the new model of primary mental health care into six GP practices. An integrated process evaluation evaluated the process and impact of care.

resultsImplementation quickly stalled as we identified problems with the described model of care when applied in a changing and variable primary care context. The team therefore switched to using the NPT framework to support the systematic identification and modification of the components of the complex intervention: including the core components that made it distinct (the consultation approach) and the variable components (organisational issues) that made it work in practice. The extra work significantly reduced the time available for outcome evaluation. However findings demonstrated moderately successful implementation of the model and a suggestion of hypothesised changes in outcomes.

conclusionsThe BounceBack project demonstrates the development of a complex intervention from practice. It highlights the use of Normalisation Process Theory to support development, and not just implementation, of a complex intervention; and describes the use of the research process in the generation of practice-based evidence. Implications for future translational complex intervention research supporting practice change through scholarship are discussed.

Indexed as

AdultAgedCommunity Mental Health ServicesCooperative BehaviorDelivery of Health CareEnglandEvidence-Based PracticeFemaleGeneral PracticeHumansInterprofessional RelationsMaleMental DisordersMental HealthMiddle AgedPatient SatisfactionComplex interventionFlipped careMental healthNormalisation Process Theory (NPT)Practice-based evidenceTranslational research

Identifiers

PMID27600512
PMCPMC5012043

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.