ArticlePsychiatry research communications2021
Effectiveness of a structured intervention to make routine clinical meetings therapeutically effective (DIALOG+) for patients with depressive and anxiety disorders in Bosnia and Herzegovina: A cluster randomised controlled trial.
Article in Psychiatry research communications, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- DIALOG+ for service users with chronic depression: a cluster-randomised controlled feasibility trial and qualitative evaluation.BMC psychiatry · 2026Trial
- Outcomes and experiences of DIALOG+ provided remotely for patients with anxiety disorders-A non-controlled pilot trial.PloS one · 2025Trial
- Improving treatment of patients with psychosis in low-and-middle-income countries in Southeast Europe: Results from a hybrid effectiveness-implementation, pragmatic, cluster-randomized clinical trial (IMPULSE).European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists · 2022Trial
- Using theory of change to better address social and economic needs in mental health services.International journal of mental health systems · 2026Article
- Quality of Life Measurement Tools in Interventions for Anxiety and Depressive Disorders: A Systematic Literature Review in Global Settings.Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment · 2026Review
- Patients' and clinicians' experiences of DIALOG+ in primary health care in Bosnia and Herzegovina: a qualitative interview study using thematic analysis.BMC primary care · 2025Article
- A mixed-methods study exploring the benefits, drawbacks, and utilization of data in care: Findings from the EPI-CAL early psychosis learning health care network.Schizophrenia research · 2025Review
- Article
- Perceived sustainability of psychosocial treatment in low- and middle-income countries in South-Eastern Europe.BJPsych open · 2022Article
- Common patient experiences across three resource-oriented interventions for severe mental illness: a qualitative study in low-resource settings.BMC psychiatry · 2022Article
- 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
backgroundDIALOG+ is a patient-centred, solution-focused intervention, which aims to make routine patient-clinician meetings therapeutically effective. Existing evidence suggests that it is effective for patients with psychotic disorders in high-income countries. We tested the effectiveness of DIALOG + for patients with depressive and anxiety disorders in Bosnia and Herzegovina, a middle-income country.
methodsWe conducted a parallel-group, cluster randomised controlled trial of DIALOG+ in an outpatient clinic in Sarajevo. Patients inclusion criteria were: 18 years and older, a diagnosis of depressive or anxiety disorders, and low quality of life. Clinicians and their patients were randomly allocated to either the DIALOG + intervention or routine care in a 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome, quality of life, and secondary outcomes, psychiatric symptoms and objective social outcomes, were measured at 6- and 12-months by blinded assessors.
resultsFifteen clinicians and 72 patients were randomised. Loss to follow-up was 12% at 6-months and 19% at 12-months. Quality of life did not significantly differ between intervention and control group after six months, but patients receiving DIALOG + had significantly better quality of life after 12 months, with a medium effect size (Cohen's d = 0.632, p = 0.007). General symptoms as well as specifically anxiety and depression symptoms were significantly lower after six and 12 months, and the objective social situation showed a statistical trend after 12 months, all in favour of the intervention group. No adverse events were reported. LIMITATIONS: Delivery of the intervention was variable and COVID-19 affected 12-month follow-up assessments in both groups.
conclusionThe findings suggest DIALOG + could be an effective treatment option for improving quality of life and reducing psychiatric symptoms in patients with depressive and anxiety disorders in a low-resource setting.
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.