Observational studyInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022
A Comparison of Self-Referral and Referral via Primary Care Providers, through Two Similar Digital Mental Health Services in Western Australia.
Observational study in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Internet-Delivered Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Social Anxiety Disorder: Nationwide Retrospective Cohort Observational Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Observational
- MyADHD: A therapist-guided internet-delivered intervention for adult ADHD - Results from a single-armed open clinical trial in routine care.Internet interventions · 2026Article
- Predicting the path to guided ICBT success across referral pathway for moderate depression and anxiety disorders.Internet interventions · 2026Article
- A pre-treatment comparison of referral pathways to guided ICBT for depression and anxiety disorders - A naturalistic study in routine clinical care.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Do people residing in low socioeconomic areas engage with and benefit from digital mental health services?Internet interventions · 2025Article
- Key questions to ask before implementing a Digital Mental Health Service (DMHS): A primer for policy makers.Internet interventions · 2025Review
- Effectiveness of General Practitioner Referral Versus Self-Referral Pathways to Guided Internet-Delivered Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Depression, Panic Disorder, and Social Anxiety Disorder: Naturalistic Study.JMIR mental health · 2025Article
- Prevalence and Predictors of Long COVID in Patients Accessing a National Digital Mental Health Service.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Circumstances of suicide after registration with a national digital mental health service: an analysis of coroners' reports.BJPsych open · 2023Article
- Effectiveness of internet delivered cognitive behaviour therapy provided as routine care for people in the depressed phase of bipolar disorder treated with Lithium.PLOS digital health · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Digital mental health services (DMHSs) deliver mental health information, assessment, and treatment, via the internet, telephone, or other digital channels. The current study compares two DMHSs operating in Western Australia (WA)-The Practitioner Online Referral System (PORTS) and MindSpot. Both provide telephone and online psychological services at no cost to patients or referrers. However, PORTS is accessed by patients via referral from health practitioners, and is designed to reach those who are financially, geographically, or otherwise disadvantaged. In contrast, MindSpot services are available to all Australian residents and patients can self-refer. This observational study compares characteristics and treatment outcomes for patients of PORTS and MindSpot in WA. Eligible patients were people who resided in WA and registered with either clinic from January 2019 to December 2020. Results showed that PORTS patients were more likely to be older, male, and unemployed. They were less likely to report a tertiary education and were more likely to live in areas with higher levels of socioeconomic disadvantage. Despite these differences, treatment outcomes were excellent for patients from both clinics. Results provide further evidence for the accessibility, acceptability, and effectiveness of DMHSs regardless of referral pathway or patient characteristics.
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.