SynthesisBMJ open2020
Clinical effectiveness and cost effectiveness of individual mental health workers colocated within primary care practices: a systematic literature review.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of collaborative care on recognition and management of common mental disorders by general practitioners: a cluster-randomised trial in Norway.BMC primary care · 2026Trial
- Model of integrated mental health video consultations for people with depression or anxiety in primary care (PROVIDE-C): assessor masked, multicentre, randomised controlled trial.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2024Trial
- Child and adolescent mental health burden, policies, and services in high-income countries and areas in the Western Pacific Region.The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2025Review
- Integrating youth mental health practice nurses into general practice: effects on outpatient mental health care utilization among children and adolescents.European child & adolescent psychiatry · 2025Article
- Primary mental health workers addressing youth mental health problems and referrals in general practice: a seven-year time-trend study.BMC primary care · 2025Article
- A mixed methods analysis of U.S. perinatal providers' attitudes towards culturally relevant infant mental health integration in obstetrical care.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
- Effectiveness of community mental health nurses in an integrated primary care service: An observational cohort study.International journal of nursing studies advances · 2024Article
- Willingness toward psychosocial support during cancer treatment: a critical yet challenging construct in psychosocial care.Translational behavioral medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesMental health disorders contribute significantly to the global burden of disease and lead to extensive strain on health systems. The integration of mental health workers into primary care has been proposed as one possible solution, but evidence of clinical and cost effectiveness of this approach is unclear. We reviewed the clinical and cost effectiveness of mental health workers colocated within primary care practices.
designSystematic literature review. DATA SOURCES: We searched the Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, Healthcare Management Information Consortium (HMIC) and Global Health databases. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: All quantitative studies published before July 2019 were eligible for the review; participants of any age and gender were included. Studies did not need to report a certain outcome measure or comparator in order to be eligible. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data were extracted using a standardised table; however, pooled analysis proved unfeasible. Studies were assessed for risk of bias using the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool and the Cochrane collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials.
resultsFifteen studies from four countries were included. Mental health worker integration was associated with mental health benefits to varied populations, including minority groups and those with comorbid chronic diseases. Furthermore, the interventions were correlated with high patient satisfaction and increases in specialist mental health referrals among minority populations. However, there was insufficient evidence to suggest clinical outcomes were significantly different from usual general practitioner care.
conclusionsWhile there appear to be some benefits associated with mental health worker integration in primary care practices, we found insufficient evidence to conclude that an onsite primary care mental health worker is significantly more clinically or cost effective when compared with usual general practitioner care. There should therefore be an increased emphasis on generating new evidence from clinical trials to better understand the benefits and effectiveness of mental health workers colocated within primary care practices.
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.