Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33591277›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2021

Evaluation of a Blended Relapse Prevention Program for Anxiety and Depression in General Practice: Qualitative Study.

Esther Krijnen-de Bruin, Jasmijn A Geerlings, Anna Dt Muntingh, Willemijn D Scholten, Otto R Maarsingh, Annemieke van Straten, Neeltje M Batelaan, Berno van Meijel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2021. 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

8 authors.

Esther Krijnen-de Bruin *Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Psychiatry, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0800-8130
Jasmijn A Geerlings *GGZ inGeest Specialized Mental Health Care, Amsterdam, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4591-8184
Anna Dt MuntinghAmsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Psychiatry, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0153-9203
Willemijn D ScholtenAmsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Psychiatry, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4765-2749
Otto R MaarsinghAmsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, General Practice & Elderly Care Medicine, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3747-9217
Annemieke van StratenAmsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Clinical Psychology, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6875-2215
Neeltje M BatelaanAmsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Psychiatry, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6444-3781
Berno van MeijelAmsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Psychiatry, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2198-1528

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundExisting studies have yet to investigate the perspectives of patients and professionals concerning relapse prevention programs for patients with remitted anxiety or depressive disorders in primary care. User opinions should be considered when optimizing the use and implementation of interventions.

objectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the GET READY relapse prevention programs for patients with remitted anxiety or depressive disorders in general practice.

methodsSemistructured interviews (N=26) and focus group interviews (N=2) with patients and mental health professionals (MHPs) in the Netherlands were performed. Patients with remitted anxiety or depressive disorders and their MHPs who participated in the GET READY study were interviewed individually. Findings from the interviews were tested in focus group interviews with patients and MHPs. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis.

resultsParticipants were positive about the program because it created awareness of relapse risks. Lack of motivation, lack of recognizability, lack of support from the MHP, and symptom severity (too low or too high) appeared to be limiting factors in the use of the program. MHPs play a crucial role in motivating and supporting patients in relapse prevention. The perspectives of patients and MHPs were largely in accordance, although they had different perspectives concerning responsibilities for taking initiative.

conclusionsThe implementation of the GET READY program was challenging. Guidance from MHPs should be offered for relapse prevention programs based on eHealth. Both MHPs and patients should align their expectations concerning responsibilities in advance to ensure optimal usage. Usage of blended relapse prevention programs may be further enhanced by diagnosis-specific programs and easily accessible support from MHPs. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.1186/s12888-019-2034-6.

Indexed as

anxiety disorderdepressive disordereHealthgeneral practicequalitative researchrelapse prevention

Identifiers

PMID33591277
PMCPMC7925144

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.