ArticleBMC psychiatry2020
Barriers to integrating routine depression screening into community low vision rehabilitation services: a mixed methods study.
Article in BMC psychiatry, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 3 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Screening tools for ruling out mood and anxiety disorders in adults in primary care: a rapid systematic review.BMC primary care · 2025Pooled it
- The use of augmented reality and virtual reality for visual field expansion and visual acuity improvement in low vision rehabilitation: a systematic review.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2023Pooled it
- Association Between Visual Impairment and Depression in Patients Attending Eye Clinics: A Meta-analysis.JAMA ophthalmology · 2021Pooled it
- Mental Health in Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Disorders: A Work Group Report of the AAAAI Eosinophilic Gastrointestinal Disorders Committee.The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. In practice · 2026Article
- How Do Optometrists Approach Directed Questioning on Smoking Status in a Centrally Co-Ordinated, Publicly-Funded National Primary Care Eye Health Service?Clinical optometry · 2026Article
- Ethical Issues and Challenges Regarding the Use of Mental Health Questionnaires in Public Health Nutrition Research.Nutrients · 2025Review
- Feasibility and potential effectiveness of the IdentifEYE training programmes to address mental health problems in adults with vision impairment.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2024Article
- Developing interventions to improve detection of depression in primary healthcare settings in rural Ethiopia.BJPsych open · 2024Article
- Community pharmacists' acceptability of pharmacist-delivered depression screening for older adults: a qualitative study.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2023Article
- Perspectives on Implementing the Patient Health Questionnaire-4 in Low-Vision Service Organizations to Screen for Depression and Anxiety.Translational vision science & technology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundUndetected depression is common in people with low vision and depression screening has been recommended. However, depression screening is a complex procedure for which low vision practitioners need training. This study examined the integration of routine depression screening, using two questions, and referral pathways into a national low vision service in Wales at 6 months following practitioner training, and identified key barriers to implementation.
methodsThis pre-post single group study employed a convergent mixed methods design to collect quantitative questionnaire and qualitative interview data on low vision practitioners' clinical practice and perceived barriers to implementing depression screening. Forty practitioners completed questionnaires pre-, immediately post- and 6 months post-training and nine engaged in interviews 6 months post-training. Ordinal questionnaire scores were Rasch-transformed into interval-level data before linear regression analyses were performed to determine the change in scores over time and the association between perceived barriers and clinical practice. Thematic Analysis was applied to the interviews and the narrative results merged with the questionnaire findings.
resultsBefore training, only one third of practitioners (n = 15) identified depression in low vision patients, increasing to over 90% (n = 37) at 6 months post-training, with a corresponding increase in those using validated depression screening questions from 10% (n = 4) to 80% (n = 32). Six months post-training, practitioners reported taking significantly more action in response to suspected depression (difference in means = 2.77, 95% CI 1.93 to 3.61, p < 0.001) and perceived less barriers to addressing depression (difference in means = - 0.95, 95% CI - 1.32 to - 0.59, p < 0.001). However, the screening questions were not used consistently. Some barriers to implementation remained, including perceived patient reluctance to discuss depression, time constraints and lack of confidence in addressing depression.
conclusionsThe introduction of depression screening service guidelines and training successfully increased the number of low vision practitioners identifying and addressing depression. However, standardized screening of all low vision attendees has not yet been achieved and several barriers remain. Healthcare services need to address these barriers when considering mental health screening, and further research could focus on the process from the patients' perspective, to determine the desire for and acceptability of screening.
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.