Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29256085›Full record

SynthesisJournal of general internal medicine2018

Collaborative Care for Depression among Patients with Limited English Proficiency: a Systematic Review.

Maria E Garcia, Lisa Ochoa-Frongia, Nathalie Moise, Adrian Aguilera, Alicia Fernandez

Registry-linked trialAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of general internal medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05746767 (SUPERA), which is not on this map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 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.

NCT05746767 naenrolling by invitationnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

SUPERA: Supporting Peer Interactions to Expand Access to Digital Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Spanish-speaking Safety-Net Patients in Primary Care

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of California, IrvineRan2024 to 2028Enrolled426ConditionsDepression, AnxietyArmsSupported dCBT, Unsupported dCBT
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Systematic Review of Pain Research Among Limited English Proficiency Patient Populations in Health care.Pain management nursing : official journal of the American Society of Pain Management Nurses · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  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.

Maria E GarciaDepartment of General Internal Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA. maria.garcia@ucsf.edu.
Lisa Ochoa-FrongiaDepartment of General Internal Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Nathalie MoiseCenter for Behavioral Cardiovascular Health, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY, USA.
Adrian AguileraSchool of Social Welfare, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, USA.
Alicia FernandezDepartment of General Internal Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.

Funding

Mentoring in the Context of Improving Care for Latinos with DiabetesK24DK102057 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI FERNANDEZ, ALICIA · 2014 to 2018
$919k
NIDDK NIH HHS K24 DK102057
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatients with limited English proficiency (LEP) have high rates of depression, yet face challenges accessing effective care in outpatient settings. We undertook a systematic review to investigate the effectiveness of the collaborative care model for depression for LEP patients in primary care.

methodsWe queried online PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL and EMBASE databases (January 1, 2000, to June 10, 2017) for quantitative studies comparing collaborative care to usual care to treat depression in adults with LEP in primary care. We evaluated the impact of collaborative care on depressive symptoms or on depression treatment. Two reviewers independently extracted key data from the studies and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane bias and quality assessment tool (RCTs) and the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale (non-RCTs).

resultsOf 86 titles identified, 15 were included (representing 9 studies: 5 RCTs, 3 cohort studies, and 1 case-control study). Studies included 4859 participants; 2679 (55%) reported LEP. The majority spoke Spanish (93%). The wide variability in study design and outcome definitions precluded performing a meta-analysis. Follow-up ranged from 3 months to 2 years. Three of four high-quality RCTs reported that 13-25% more patients had improved depressive symptoms when treated with culturally tailored collaborative care compared to usual care; the last had high treatment in the control arm and found equal improvement. Two non-RCT studies suggest that Spanish-speaking patients may benefit as much as, if not more than, English-speaking patients treated with collaborative care. The remaining studies reported increased receipt of preferred depression treatment (therapy vs. antidepressants) in the intervention groups. Eight of nine studies used bilingual providers to deliver the intervention. DISCUSSION: While limited by the number and variability of studies, the available research suggests that collaborative care for depression delivered by bilingual providers may be more effective than usual care among patients with LEP. Implementation studies of collaborative care, particularly among Asian and non-Spanish-speakers, are needed.

Indexed as

Communication BarriersIntersectoral CollaborationAntidepressive AgentsCohort StudiesDepressionHumansMultilingualismPatient CareRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAntidepressive Agentscollaborative caredepressionlanguage barrierslimited English proficiencysystematic review

Identifiers

PMID29256085
PMCPMC5834967

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.