Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34273026›Full record

ArticleEuropean child & adolescent psychiatry2023

What treatment outcomes matter most? A Q-study of outcome priority profiles among youth with lived experience of depression.

Karolin Rose Krause, Julian Edbrooke-Childs, Holly Alice Bear, Ana Calderón, Miranda Wolpert

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European child & adolescent psychiatry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024: response from ISOQOL's child health special interest group.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

5 authors.

Karolin Rose KrauseEvidence Based Practice Unit (EBPU), Anna Freud National Centre for Children and Families, 4-8 Rodney Street, London, N1 9JH, UK. karolin.krause@camh.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3914-7272
Julian Edbrooke-ChildsEvidence Based Practice Unit (EBPU), Anna Freud National Centre for Children and Families, 4-8 Rodney Street, London, N1 9JH, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0401-4058
Holly Alice BearEvidence Based Practice Unit (EBPU), Anna Freud National Centre for Children and Families, 4-8 Rodney Street, London, N1 9JH, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6737-6120
Ana CalderónSchool of Psychology, Universidad Gabriela Mistral, Avda. Ricardo Lyon 1177, Providencia, Santiago, Chile.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9984-6940
Miranda WolpertResearch Department of Clinical, Research Department of Clinical, University College London, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7463-4976

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Interest in youth perspectives on what constitutes an important outcome in the treatment of depression has been growing, but limited attention has been given to heterogeneity in outcome priorities, and minority viewpoints. These are important to consider for person-centred outcome tracking in clinical practice, or when conducting clinical trials targeting specific populations. This study used Q-methodology to identify outcome priority profiles among youth with lived experience of service use for depression. A purposive sample of 28 youth (aged 16-21 years) rank-ordered 35 outcome statements by importance and completed brief semi-structured interviews eliciting their sorting rationales. By-person principal component analysis was used to identify outcome priority profiles based on all Q-sort configurations. Priority profiles were described and interpreted with reference to the qualitative interview data. Four distinct outcome priority profiles were identified: "Relieving distress and experiencing a happier emotional state"; "Learning to cope with cyclical distressing emotional states"; "Understanding and processing distressing emotional states"; and "Reduced interference of ongoing distressing emotional states with daily life". All four profiles prioritised improvements in mood and the ability to feel pleasure but differed in the level of importance assigned to learning coping skills, processing experiences, and the reduced interference of depression with life and identity. As part of a person-centered approach to care delivery, care providers should routinely engage young people in conversation and shared decision-making about the types of change they would like to prioritise and track during treatment, beyond a common core of consensus outcomes.

Indexed as

Adaptation, PsychologicalDepressionAdolescentHumansTreatment OutcomeAdolescentsDepressionOutcome prioritiesQ-methodologyTreatment outcomes

Identifiers

PMID34273026
PMCPMC9908724

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.