Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28186951›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2016

Incentives and disincentives for treating of depression and anxiety in Ontario Family Health Teams: protocol for a grounded theory study.

Rachelle Ashcroft, Matthew Menear, Jose Silveira, Simone Dahrouge, Kwame McKenzie

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Patient perspectives on quality of care for depression and anxiety in primary health care teams: A qualitative study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2021
    Article
  4. 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 at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Rachelle AshcroftFactor-Inwentash Faculty of Social Work, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-5666-1946
Matthew MenearCHU de Quebec Research Centre, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada.
Jose SilveiraMental Health and Addiction Program, St. Joseph's Health Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Simone DahrougeC.T. Lamont Primary Health Care Research Centre, Bruyere Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Kwame McKenzieDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
University of Toronto · CABruyère · CACentre for Addiction and Mental Health · CACentre hospitalier universitaire de Québec · CA

Funding

CIHR MOP-142435
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThere is strong consensus that prevention and management of common mental disorders (CMDs) should occur in primary care and evidence suggests that treatment of CMDs in these settings can be effective. New interprofessional team-based models of primary care have emerged that are intended to address problems of quality and access to mental health services, yet many people continue to struggle to access care for CMDs in these settings. Insufficient attention directed towards the incentives and disincentives that influence care for CMDs in primary care, and especially in interprofessional team-based settings, may have resulted in missed opportunities to improve care quality and control healthcare costs. Our research is driven by the hypothesis that a stronger understanding of the full range of incentives and disincentives at play and their relationships with performance and other contextual factors will help stakeholders identify the critical levers of change needed to enhance prevention and management of CMDs in interprofessional primary care contexts. Participant recruitment began in May 2016. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: An explanatory qualitative design, based on a constructivist grounded theory methodology, will be used. Our study will be conducted in the Canadian province of Ontario, a province that features a widely implemented interprofessional team-based model of primary care. Semistructured interviews will be conducted with a diverse range of healthcare professionals and stakeholders that can help us understand how various incentives and disincentives influence the provision of evidence-based collaborative care for CMDs. A final sample size of 100 is anticipated. The protocol was peer reviewed by experts who were nominated by the funding organisation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The model we generate will shed light on the incentives and disincentives that are and should be in place to support high-quality CMD care and help stimulate more targeted, coordinated stakeholder responses to improving primary mental healthcare quality.

Indexed as

Family HealthMental Health ServicesPrimary Health CareAnxietyConsensusCooperative BehaviorDepressionFemaleGrounded TheoryHumansInterprofessional RelationsMaleMotivationOntarioQuality of Health CareDISINCENTIVESINCENTIVESMENTAL HEALTHPRIMARY CAREPROTOCOLQUALITATIVE RESEARCH

Identifiers

PMID28186951
PMCPMC5128770
OpenAlexW2549777616

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.