ArticlePediatric quality & safety
Increasing Recognition and Diagnosis of Adolescent Depression: Project RedDE: A Cluster Randomized Trial.
Article in Pediatric quality & safety. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Screening for depression in children and adolescents in primary care or non-mental health settings: a systematic review update.Systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Interventions to improve the detection of depression in primary healthcare: systematic review.Systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Improving Adolescent Depression in Primary Care: A Quality Improvement Initiative.The journal for nurse practitioners : JNP · 2023Article
- Improving Diagnostic Performance in Pediatrics: Three Steps Ahead.Pediatric quality & safetyArticle
- Contributing Factors for Pediatric Ambulatory Diagnostic Process Errors: Project RedDE.Pediatric quality & safetyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Adolescent depression causes appreciable morbidity and is underdiagnosed in primary care. This study investigated whether a quality improvement collaborative (QIC) increases the frequency of adolescent depression diagnoses, thus reducing missed diagnoses.
methodsDuring a cluster-randomized clinical trial, a national cohort of primary care pediatric practices worked in different orders based on randomization to improve performance on each of three different diagnoses; one was increasing adolescent depression diagnoses. While improving their first diagnosis during an 8-month action period, practices collected control data for a different diagnosis. In two subsequent 8-month periods, practices worked to improve two additional diagnoses and continued to provide data on the ability to sustain and maintain improvements. The QIC intervention included day-long video conferences, transparent data sharing, analysis of failures, QI coaching, and tools to help improve diagnostic performance, including the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 Modified. The primary outcome was the measured frequency of depression diagnoses in adolescent health supervision visits compared via generalized mixed-effects regression models.
resultsForty-three practices were randomized with 31 in the final analysis. We included 3,394 patient visits in the control and 4,114 in the intervention phases. The adjusted percentage of patients with depression diagnoses increased from 6.6% in the control to 10.5% in intervention phase (Risk Difference (RD) 3.9%; 95% CI 2.4%, 5.3%). Practices sustained these increases while working on different diagnoses during the second (RD -0.4%; 95% CI -2.3, 1.4%), and third action periods (RD -0.1%; 95% CI -2.7%, 2.4%).
conclusionsA QIC intervention can sustainably increase adolescent depression diagnoses.
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.