Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27703756›Full record

ArticleBJPsych open2016

Online screening and feedback to increase help-seeking for mental health problems: population-based randomised controlled trial.

Philip J Batterham, Alison L Calear, Matthew Sunderland, Natacha Carragher, Jacqueline L Brewer

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BJPsych open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 2 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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. "I Wanted to See How Bad it Was": Online Self-screening as a Critical Transition Point Among Young Adults with Common Mental Health Conditions.Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. CHI Conference · 2022
    Article
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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.

Philip J Batterham, BSc (Psychology) Hons, MPH, PhD.
Alison L Calear, BAppPsych (Hons), PhD, National Institute for Mental Health Research, Research School of Population Health, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.
Matthew Sunderland, BPsych (Hons), PhD.
Natacha Carragher, BSc (Hons) Applied Psych, PhD, NHMRC Centre of Research Excellence in Mental Health and Substance Use, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Jacqueline L Brewer, BPsych (Hons), PhD, National Institute for Mental Health Research, Research School of Population Health, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCommunity-based screening for mental health problems may increase service use through feedback to individuals about their severity of symptoms and provision of contacts for appropriate services.

aimsThe effect of symptom feedback on service use was assessed. Secondary outcomes included symptom change and study attrition.

methodUsing online recruitment, 2773 participants completed a comprehensive survey including screening for depression (

resultsA negative effect of providing social anxiety feedback to individuals was observed, with significant reductions in professional service use. Greater attrition and lower intentions to seek help were also observed after feedback.

conclusionsOnline mental health screening with feedback is not effective for promoting professional service use. Alternative models of online screening require further investigation. DECLARATION OF INTEREST: None. COPYRIGHT AND USAGE: © The Royal College of Psychiatrists 2016. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Non-Commercial, No Derivatives (CC BY-NC-ND) licence.

Identifiers

PMID27703756
PMCPMC4995576

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.