Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29562906›Full record

Trial reportBMC medical education2018

A pilot randomised controlled study of the mental health first aid eLearning course with UK medical students.

E Bethan Davies, Emmeline Beever, Cris Glazebrook

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC medical education, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
7.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 70 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

E Bethan DaviesDivision of Psychiatry and Applied Psychology, School of Medicine, Institute of Mental Health, The University of Nottingham, Triumph Road, Nottingham, NG7 2TU, UK. bethan.davies@nottingham.ac.uk.
Emmeline BeeverSchool of Medicine, The University of Nottingham, Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham, NG7 2UH, UK.
Cris GlazebrookDivision of Psychiatry and Applied Psychology, School of Medicine, Institute of Mental Health, The University of Nottingham, Triumph Road, Nottingham, NG7 2TU, UK.
Institute of Mental Health · GBNIHR MindTech MedTech Co-operative · GBQueen's Medical Centre · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMedical students face many barriers to seeking out professional help for their mental health, including stigma relating to mental illness, and often prefer to seek support and advice from fellow students. Improving medical students' mental health literacy and abilities to support someone experiencing a mental health problem could reduce barriers to help seeking and improve mental health in this population. Mental Health First Aid (MHFA) is an evidence-based intervention designed to improve mental health literacy and ability to respond to someone with a mental health problem. This pilot randomised controlled trial aims to evaluate the MHFA eLearning course in UK medical students.

methodsFifty-five medical students were randomised to receive six weeks access to the MHFA eLearning course (n = 27) or to a no-access control group (n = 28). Both groups completed baseline (pre-randomisation) and follow-up (six weeks post-randomisation) online questionnaires measuring recognition of a mental health problem, mental health first aid intentions, confidence to help a friend experiencing a mental health problem, and stigmatising attitudes. Course feedback was gathered at follow-up.

resultsMore participants were lost follow-up in the MHFA group (51.9%) compared to control (21.4%). Both intention-to-treat (ITT) and non-ITT analyses showed that the MHFA intervention improved mental health first aid intentions (p = <.001) and decreased stigmatising attitudes towards people with mental health problems (p = .04). While ITT analysis found no significant Group x Time interaction for confidence to help a friend, the non-ITT analysis did show the intervention improved confidence to help a friend with mental health problems (p = <.001), and improved mental health knowledge (p = .003). Medical students in the intervention group reported a greater number of actual mental health first aid actions at follow-up (p = .006). Feedback about the MHFA course was generally positive, with participants stating it helped improve their knowledge and confidence to help someone.

conclusionThis pilot study demonstrated the potential for the MHFA eLearning course to improve UK medical students' mental health first aid skills, confidence to help a friend and stigmatising attitudes. It could be useful in supporting their own and others' mental health while studying and in their future healthcare careers.

trial registrationRetrospectively registered ( ISRCTN11219848 ).

Indexed as

Computer-Assisted InstructionSocial StigmaEducation, MedicalEvidence-Based MedicineFemaleFirst AidHumansIntention to Treat AnalysisMaleMental DisordersMental HealthPilot ProjectsStudents, MedicalUnited KingdomYoung AdulteLearningHealth promotionMedical studentsMental healthMental health first aidMental health literacyStigmaUndergraduate

Identifiers

PMID29562906
PMCPMC5863362
OpenAlexW2799693731

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.