Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31533670›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2019

Process evaluation of the Getting it Right study and acceptability and feasibility of screening for depression with the aPHQ-9.

Sara Farnbach, Graham Gee, Anne-Marie Eades, John Robert Evans, Jamie Fernando, Belinda Hammond, Matty Simms, Karrina DeMasi, Nick Glozier, Alex Brown and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract readValidation Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. 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

12 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Sara FarnbachThe George Institute for Global Health, The University of New South Wales, PO Box M201, Missenden Road, Sydney, New South Wales, 2050, Australia. s.farnbach@unsw.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7013-1079
Graham GeeVictorian Aboriginal Health Service, Melbourne, Victoria, 3065, Australia.
Anne-Marie EadesThe George Institute for Global Health, The University of New South Wales, PO Box M201, Missenden Road, Sydney, New South Wales, 2050, Australia.
John Robert EvansThe University of Technology, Sydney, New South Wales, 2006, Australia.
Jamie FernandoThe Glen Centre (Ngampie), Chittaway Point, New South Wales, 2261, Australia.
Belinda HammondNunkuwarrin Yunti of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, 5000, Australia.
Matty SimmsThe University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, 2006, Australia.
Karrina DeMasiAboriginal Medical Services Alliance Northern Territory, Darwin, 0801, Australia.
Nick GlozierBrain and Mind Centre and Central Clinical School University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, 2052, Australia.
Alex BrownWardliparingga Aboriginal Research Unit, South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Maree L HackettThe George Institute for Global Health, The University of New South Wales, PO Box M201, Missenden Road, Sydney, New South Wales, 2050, Australia.
Getting it Right Investigators
The University of Sydney · AUUniversity of Technology Sydney · AUThe University of Melbourne · AUUniversity of Newcastle Australia · AU

Funding

Depression, Cytokines, and Pancreatic CancerR21CA101767 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI BREITBART, WILLIAM · 2005 to 2006
$299k
George Institute for Global Health John Chalmers Program Grant ScholarshipNational Health and Medical Research Council APP101767National Health and Medical Research Council APP1056434National Health and Medical Research Council Career Development Fellowship, Level 2, APP1141328National Heart Foundation Future Leader Fellowship 10034University of New South Wales Scientia Fellowship (2018-2021)University of Sydney Cross Cultural Public Health Research Award
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Getting it Right study determined the validity, sensitivity, specificity and acceptability of the culturally adapted 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (aPHQ-9) as a screening tool for depression in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (hereafter referred to as Indigenous) people. In this process evaluation we aimed to explore staff perceptions about whether Getting it Right was conducted per protocol, and if the aPHQ-9 was considered an acceptable and feasible screening tool for depression in primary healthcare. This process evaluation will provide information for clinicians and policy makers about the experiences of staff and patients with Getting it Right and what they thought about using the aPHQ-9.

methodsProcess evaluation using grounded theory approaches. Semi-structured interviews with primary healthcare staff from services participating in Getting it Right were triangulated with feedback (free-text and elicited) from participants collected during the validation study and field notes. Data were thematically analysed according to the Getting it Right study protocol to identify the acceptability and feasibility of the aPHQ-9.

resultsPrimary healthcare staff (n = 36) and community members (n = 4) from nine of the ten participating Getting it Right services and Indigenous participants (n = 500) from the ten services that took part. Most staff reported that the research was conducted according to the study protocol. Staff from two services reported sometimes recruiting opportunistically (rather than recruiting consecutive patients attending the service as outlined in the main study protocol), when they spoke to patients who they knew from previous interactions, because they perceived their previous relationship may increase the likelihood of patients participating. All Getting it Right participants responded to at least six of the seven feedback questions and 20% provided free-text feedback. Most staff said they would use the aPHQ-9 and most participants said that the questions were easy to understand (87%), the response categories made sense (89%) and that they felt comfortable answering the questions (91%).

conclusionGetting it Right was predominantly conducted according to the study protocol. The aPHQ-9, the first culturally adapted, nationally validated, freely available depression screening tool for use by Indigenous people, appears to be acceptable and feasible to use.

trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry ANZCTR12614000705684 , 03/07/2014.

Indexed as

AdultAustraliaDepressionFeasibility StudiesFemaleHealth Services, IndigenousHumansMaleMass ScreeningPatient Acceptance of Health CarePatient Health QuestionnairePrimary Health CareResearch DesignDepression screeningIndigenous healthPrimary healthcareProcess evaluationSocial and emotional wellbeingValidation study

Identifiers

PMID31533670
PMCPMC6749631
OpenAlexW2974274562

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.