Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29061185›Full record

Trial reportTrials2017

The Community Navigator Study: a feasibility randomised controlled trial of an intervention to increase community connections and reduce loneliness for people with complex anxiety or depression.

Brynmor Lloyd-Evans, Jessica K Bone, Vanessa Pinfold, Glyn Lewis, Jo Billings, Johanna Frerichs, Kate Fullarton, Rebecca Jones, Sonia Johnson

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Trials, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. The emotional labour of boundary spanning.Journal of integrated care (Brighton, England) · 2017
    Article
  9. 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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Brynmor Lloyd-EvansDivision of Psychiatry, University College London, London, W1T 7NF, UK. b.lloyd-evans@ucl.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9866-788X
Jessica K BoneDivision of Psychiatry, University College London, London, W1T 7NF, UK.
Vanessa PinfoldThe McPin Foundation, London, SE1 0EH, UK.
Glyn LewisDivision of Psychiatry, University College London, London, W1T 7NF, UK.
Jo BillingsDivision of Psychiatry, University College London, London, W1T 7NF, UK.
Johanna FrerichsThe McPin Foundation, London, SE1 0EH, UK.
Kate FullartonDivision of Psychiatry, University College London, London, W1T 7NF, UK.
Rebecca JonesDivision of Psychiatry, University College London, London, W1T 7NF, UK.
Sonia JohnsonDivision of Psychiatry, University College London, London, W1T 7NF, UK.
University College London · GBMcPin Foundation · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLoneliness is associated with poor health outcomes at all ages, including shorter life expectancy and greater risk of developing depression. People with mental health problems are particularly vulnerable to loneliness and, for those with anxiety or depression, loneliness is associated with poorer outcomes. Interventions which support people to utilise existing networks and access new social contact are advocated in policy but there is little evidence regarding their effectiveness. People with mental health problems have potential to benefit from interventions to reduce loneliness, but evidence is needed regarding their feasibility, acceptability and outcomes. An intervention to reduce loneliness for people with anxiety or depression treated in secondary mental health services was developed for this study, which will test the feasibility and acceptability of delivering and evaluating it through a randomised controlled trial.

methodsIn this feasibility trial, 40 participants with anxiety or depression will be recruited through two secondary mental health services in London and randomised to an intervention (n = 30) or control group (n = 10). The control group will receive standard care and written information about local community resources. The coproduced intervention, developed in this study, includes up to ten sessions with a 'Community Navigator' over a 6-month period. Community Navigators will work with people individually to increase involvement in social activities, with the aim of reducing feelings of loneliness. Data will be collected at baseline and at 6-month follow-up - the end of the intervention period. The acceptability of the intervention and feasibility of participant recruitment and retention will be assessed. Potential primary and secondary outcomes for a future definitive trial will be completed to assess response and completeness, including measures of loneliness, depression and anxiety. Qualitative interviews with participants, staff and other stakeholders will explore experiences of Community Navigator support, the mechanisms by which it may have its effects and suggestions for improving the programme. DISCUSSION: Our trial will provide preliminary evidence of the feasibility and acceptability of Community Navigator support and of trial procedures for testing this. The results will inform a future definitive randomised controlled trial of this intervention.

trial registrationISRCTN10771821 . Registered on 3 April 2017.

Indexed as

Interpersonal RelationsLonelinessPatient NavigationPsychosocial Support SystemsAnxietyCommunity Mental Health ServicesDepressionFeasibility StudiesHumansInterviews as TopicLondonMental HealthQualitative ResearchResearch DesignTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeAnxietyCommunity navigationDepressionFeasibility StudyLonelinessRandomised controlled trial

Identifiers

PMID29061185
PMCPMC5654042
OpenAlexW2766681232

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.