Trial reportBMC psychiatry2021
How do care providers evaluate collaboration? - qualitative process evaluation of a cluster-randomized controlled trial of collaborative and stepped care for patients with mental disorders.
Trial report in BMC psychiatry, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03226743 (Collaborative and Stepped Care in Mental Health by Overcoming Treatment Sector Barriers), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 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.
Collaborative and Stepped Care in Mental Health by Overcoming Treatment Sector Barriers: A Cluster-randomized Controlled Trial (COMET)
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cost-utility analysis of a collaborative and stepped care model in patients with mental disorders in German primary care (the COMET study).BMC psychiatry · 2025Trial
- Collaborative and Stepped Care for Mental Disorders: Results of a Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial in Outpatient Care (The COMET Study).Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2025Trial
- Professional perspectives on roles and structural gaps in interprofessional collaboration for suicide prevention: a qualitative study.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- A stepped care approach to mental health in Singapore: challenges and opportunities.BMC global and public health · 2025Review
- Working Together to Deliver Person-Centred Care Within the Stepped Care Model: An Australian Multidisciplinary Perspective.International journal of mental health nursing · 2025Article
- Interorganisational collaboration to improve accessibility of diagnostic evaluations for children with a developmental disability.Health services insights · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCollaborative and stepped care (CSC) models are recommended for mental disorders. Their successful implementation depends on effective collaboration between involved care providers from primary and specialist care. To gain insights into the collaboration experiences of care providers in CSC against the backdrop of usual mental health care, a qualitative process evaluation was realized as part of a cluster-randomized controlled trial (COMET) of a collaborative and stepped care model in Hamburg (Germany).
methodsSemi-structured interviews were conducted with N = 24 care providers from primary and specialist care (outpatient psychotherapists and psychiatrists, inpatient/ day clinic mental health providers) within and outside of COMET at the trial's beginning and 12 months later. Interviews were analyzed applying a qualitative structuring content analysis approach, combining deductive and inductive category development.
resultsUsual mental health care was considered deficient in resources, with collaboration being scarce and mainly taking place in small informal networks. Within the COMET trial, quicker referral paths were welcomed, as were quarterly COMET network meetings which provided room for exchange and fostered mutual understanding. Yet, also in COMET, collaboration remained difficult due to communication problems, the unfavorable regional distribution of the COMET care providers and interprofessional discrepancies regarding each profession's role, competencies and mutual esteem. Ideas for improvement included more localized networks, the inclusion of further professions and the overall amelioration of mental health care regarding resources and remuneration, especially for collaborative activities.
conclusionsThe process evaluation of the COMET trial revealed the benefits of creating room for interprofessional encounter to foster collaborative care. Despite the benefits of faster patient referrals, the COMET network did not fulfill all care providers' prior expectations. A focus should be set on interprofessional competencies, mutual perception and role clarification, as these have been revealed as significant barriers to collaboration within CSC models such as COMET.
trial registrationThe COMET trial (Collaborative and Stepped Care in Mental Health by Overcoming Treatment Sector Barriers) has been registered on July 24, 2017 under the trial registration number NCT03226743 .
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.