Trial reportEthnicity & disease2018
12-Month Cost Outcomes of Community Engagement Versus Technical Assistance for Depression Quality Improvement: A Partnered, Cluster Randomized, Comparative-Effectiveness Trial.
Trial report in Ethnicity & disease, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01699789 (CPIC is a Community Partnered Participatory Research), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
CPIC is a Community Partnered Participatory Research (CPPR) Project of Community and Academic Partners Working Together to Learn the Best Way to Reduce Depression in Our Communities.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Cost and economic evidence for asset-based approaches to health improvement and their evaluation methods: a systematic review.BMC public health · 2024Pooled it
- Scoping review of costs of implementation strategies in community, public health and healthcare settings.BMJ open · 2022Article
- Editorial: Developments in Community Partnered Participatory Research for Behavioral Health.Ethnicity & diseaseArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objective: To compare community engagement and planning (CEP) for coalition support to implement depression quality improvement (QI) to resources for services (RS) effects on service-use costs over a 12-month period. Design: Matched health and community programs (N=93) were cluster-randomized within communities to CEP or RS. Setting: Two Los Angeles communities. Participants: Adults (N=1,013) with depressive symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-8) ≥10); 85% African American and Latino. Interventions: CEP and RS to support programs in depression QI. Main Outcome Measures: Intervention training and service-use costs over 12 months. Results: CEP planning and training costs were almost 3 times higher than RS, largely due to greater CEP provider training participation vs RS, with no significant differences in 12-month service-use costs. Conclusions: Compared with RS, CEP had higher planning and training costs with similar service-use costs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.