ArticleBMJ open2020
Study protocol for a randomised controlled trial evaluating an evidence-based, stepped and coordinated care service model for mental disorders (RECOVER).
Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03459664 (Evaluation of a Cross-sectional Coordinated, Severity Stepped, Evidence-based Care Model for Mental Disorders), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
Evaluation of a Cross-sectional Coordinated, Severity Stepped, Evidence-based Care Model for Mental Disorders
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Psychometric evaluation of the German version of the Recovering Quality of Life (ReQoL) measures in patients with affective disorders.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2023Trial
- Excess costs of mental disorders by level of severity.Social psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology · 2023Trial
- [Transitional psychiatric needs and identity development of adolescents in Tyrol].Neuropsychiatrie : Klinik, Diagnostik, Therapie und Rehabilitation : Organ der Gesellschaft Osterreichischer Nervenarzte und Psychiater · 2024Article
- Dialectical behavior therapy (DBT) in an assertive community treatment structure (ACT): testing integrated care borderline (ICB) in a randomized controlled trial (RECOVER).Borderline personality disorder and emotion dysregulation · 2024Article
- Interorganisational collaboration to improve accessibility of diagnostic evaluations for children with a developmental disability.Health services insights · 2024Article
- Acute psychiatric care: approaches to increasing the range of services and improving access and quality of care.World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 2022Article
- Emerging models and trends in mental health crisis care in England: a national investigation of crisis care systems.BMC health services research · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
41 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionHealthcare systems around the world are looking for solutions to the growing problem of mental disorders. RECOVER is the synonym for an evidence-based, stepped and cross-sectoral coordinated care service model for mental disorders. RECOVER implements a cross-sectoral network with managed care, comprehensive psychological, somatic and social diagnostics, crisis resolution and a general structure of four severity levels, each with assigned evidence-based therapy models (eg, assertive community treatment) and therapies (eg, psychotherapy). The study rationale is the investigation of the effectiveness and efficiency of stepped and integrated care in comparison to standard care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The trial is conducted in accordance to the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials Statement. The study aims to compare the RECOVER model with treatment as usual (TAU). The following questions are examined: Does RECOVER reduce healthcare costs compared with TAU? Does RECOVER improve patient-relevant outcomes? Is RECOVER cost-effective compared with TAU? A total sample of 890 patients with mental disorders will be assessed at baseline and individually randomised into RECOVER or TAU. Follow-up assessments are conducted after 6 and 12 months. As primary outcomes, cost reduction, improvement in symptoms, daily functioning and quality of life as well as cost-effectiveness ratios will be measured. In addition, several secondary outcomes will be assessed. Primary and secondary outcomes are evaluated according to the intention-to-treat principle. Mixed linear or logistic regression models are used with the direct maximum likelihood estimation procedure which results in unbiassed estimators under the missing-at-random assumption. Costs due to healthcare utilisation and productivity losses are evaluated using difference-in-difference regressions. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval from the ethics committee of the Hamburg Medical Association has been obtained (PV5672). The results will be disseminated to service users and their families via the media, to healthcare professionals via professional training and meetings and to researchers via conferences and publications. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER AND REGISTRY NAME: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03459664), RECOVER PROTOCOL VERSION: 19 March 2020 (V.3.0).
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.