Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33494831›Full record

ArticlePilot and feasibility studies2021

Reducing suicidal ideation among Turkish migrants in the Netherlands and in the UK: the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial of a guided online intervention.

Ozlem Eylem, Annemieke van Straten, Leonore de Wit, Shanaya Rathod, Kamaldeep Bhui, Ad J F M Kerkhof

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pilot and feasibility studies, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
7.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 58 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Ozlem EylemDepartment of Clinical Psychology, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 7 van der Boechorststraat, Amsterdam, 1081, BT, Netherlands. o.eylem@vu.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5695-9523
Annemieke van StratenDepartment of Clinical Psychology, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 7 van der Boechorststraat, Amsterdam, 1081, BT, Netherlands.
Leonore de WitDepartment of Clinical Psychology, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 7 van der Boechorststraat, Amsterdam, 1081, BT, Netherlands.
Shanaya RathodSouthern Health NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK.
Kamaldeep BhuiCentre for Psychiatry, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Charterhouse Square, London, EC1M 6BQ, UK.
Ad J F M KerkhofDepartment of Clinical Psychology, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 7 van der Boechorststraat, Amsterdam, 1081, BT, Netherlands.
GGD Amsterdam · NLNetherlands Leprosy Relief · NLSouthern Health NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Oxford · GB

Funding

Department of Health 10/141/02European Commission 2013/330 - 460
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe evidence for the effectiveness of e-mental health interventions among ethnic minorities is still preliminary. This mixed methods study investigates the feasibility of a culturally adapted, guided online intervention with the intention to understand how it works and for whom to inform refinement. It also examines its likely effectiveness in reducing suicidal ideation when compared with the treatment as usual.

methodsTurkish migrants with mild to moderate suicidal thoughts were recruited from the general population using social media and newspaper advertisements. The intervention group obtained direct access to a 6-week guided online intervention while participants in the waiting list condition had to wait for 6 weeks. The intervention is based on an existing online intervention and was culturally adapted. Participants in both conditions completed baseline, post-test, and follow-up questionnaires on suicidal ideation (primary outcome), depression, worrying, hopelessness, suicide attempt and self-harm, acculturation, quality of life, and usability. In addition, participants were interviewed to examine the feasibility and mechanisms of action in more depth. The responses were analysed by inductive thematic analysis.

resultsEighty-five people signed up via the study website, and we included 18 (10 intervention, 8 waitlist control). While the therapeutic benefits were emphasised (e.g. feeling connected with the intervention), the feasibility was judged to be low. The main reasons given were not having severe suicidal thoughts and not being represented by the culturally adapted intervention. No suicide attempts were recorded during the study. The suicidal ideation, depression, and hopelessness scores were improved in both groups.

conclusionAlthough intended to be a definitive trial, the current study became a feasibility study with process evaluation to understand the components and how they operate. The online intervention was not superior to the control condition. Future studies need to attend the implementation issues raised including measures of stigma, acculturation, and careful cultural adaptations alongside more attention to coaching and relational support. They should also consider how to improve engagement alongside selection of those who are motivated to use online interventions and offer alternatives for those who are not.

trial registrationNetherlands Trial Register, NTR5028 . Registered on 1 March 2015.

Indexed as

Cultural adaptatione-mental healthFeasibilityRCTSuicidal ideationTurkish migrants

Identifiers

PMID33494831
PMCPMC7830826
OpenAlexW3120917142

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.