Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33298193›Full record

ArticlePilot and feasibility studies2020

Interpersonal counselling for adolescent depression delivered by youth mental health workers without core professional training: a feasibility randomised controlled trial study protocol.

Gabriel Abotsie, Viktoria Cestaro, Brioney Gee, Jamie Murdoch, Thando Katangwe, Richard Meiser-Stedman, Lee Shepstone, David Turner, Susie Tulk, Sharon Jarrett and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pilot and feasibility studies, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

14 authors.

Gabriel AbotsieNorfolk and Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust, Norfolk, UK. gabriel.abotsie@nsft.nhs.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0597-2509
Viktoria CestaroNorfolk and Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust, Norfolk, UK.
Brioney GeeNorfolk and Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust, Norfolk, UK.
Jamie MurdochSchool of Health Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.
Thando KatangweNorwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.
Richard Meiser-StedmanDepartment of Clinical Psychology, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.
Lee ShepstoneNorwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.
David TurnerNorwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.
Susie TulkSuffolk County Council, Suffolk, UK.
Sharon JarrettSuffolk County Council, Suffolk, UK.
Jon WilsonNorfolk and Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust, Norfolk, UK.
Tim ClarkeNorfolk and Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust, Norfolk, UK.
Bonnie TeagueNorwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.
Paul WilkinsonDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

Funding

Department of Health 17/112/16Health Services and Delivery Research Programme 17/112/16
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDepression is a common health problem during adolescence and is associated with adverse academic, social and health outcomes. To meet the demand for treatment for adolescent depression, there is a need for evidence-based interventions suitable for delivery outside of specialist Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS). Interpersonal Counselling for Adolescents (IPC-A) is a brief manualised intervention for adolescent depression suitable for delivery by staff who are not qualified health professionals following participation in a brief training course. While initial piloting within Local Authority services has generated promising results, the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of IPC-A has yet to be established. This study aims to assess the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial (RCT), evaluating the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of IPC-A delivered by staff without core professional training in comparison to current provision.

methodFeasibility RCT with process evaluation using ethnographic methodology. Eligible young people (n = 60) will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio to receive either IPC-A or treatment as usual (TAU). Participants will be assessed pre-randomisation (baseline) and followed up at 5, 10 and 23 weeks post-randomisation. A parallel process evaluation will generate understanding of intervention implementation across services and explore the acceptability of the intervention from the perspective of young people and other key stakeholders.

participantsYoung people aged 12-18 years presenting to non-specialist services with symptoms of depression. Youth workers, young people and stakeholders will participate in the process evaluation. DISCUSSION: The need for effective and accessible interventions for young people with mild/sub-threshold depression who, in most cases, do not meet the threshold for mainstream mental health services is long overdue. The primary output of this feasibility trial will be the design of the subsequent full-scale trial. If the results of the current study indicate that this would be feasible, we intend to progress to a multi-site, assessor-blind, superiority RCT of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of IPC-A in comparison to TAU for adolescents presenting to non-specialist services with depressive symptoms. If satisfactory solutions to any problems encountered cannot be identified, alternative research designs will be considered. If proven effective, an IPC-A training programme could be implemented. TRIAL REGISTRY: ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN82180413 , Registered 31 December 2019.

Indexed as

AdolescentsDepressionEarly HelpInterpersonal CounsellingInterpersonal Counselling for Adolescents, Young peopleLocal AuthorityYouth Workers

Identifiers

PMID33298193
PMCPMC7727149

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.