Trial reportBMC primary care2022
Comparing a ses-sensitive and an all-ses implementation strategy to improve participation rates of patients with a lower socioeconomic background in a web-based intervention for depressive complaints: a cluster randomised trial in primary care.
Trial report in BMC primary care, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of a needs-based model of care on the characteristics of healthcare services in England: the i-THRIVE National Implementation Programme.Epidemiology and psychiatric sciences · 2025Article
- [Socioeconomic status and cecal adenocarcinoma mortality risk: an American population-based analysis].Nan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University · 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
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDepression is a major public health concern, which is most pronounced in population segments with a lower social-economic status (SES). E-health interventions for depressive complaints are proven to be effective, but their reach needs to be improved, especially among people with a lower socioeconomic status (SES). Implementing e-health interventions in the primary care setting with SES-sensitive guidance from General Practice nurses (GP nurses) may be a useful strategy to increase the reach of e-health in lower SES groups. We implemented an evidence-based online intervention that targets depressive complaints in primary care.
methodsA pragmatic cluster-randomised trial was conducted in two parallel groups where a SES sensitive (SES-sens) implementation strategy with additional face-to-face guidance by GP nurses was compared to an all-SES implementation strategy. The primary outcome was the percentage of lower SES participants in either condition. Participation was defined as completing at least 1 face-to-face session and 2 online exercises. Participation rates were evaluated using logistic mixed modelling.
resultsIn both conditions, the participation rates of lower SES participants were quite high, but were notably lower in the SES-sens implementation condition (44%) than in the all-SES implementation condition (58%). This unexpected outcome remained statistically significant even after adjusting for potential confounders between the conditions (Odds Ratio 0.43, 95%-CI 0.22 to 0.81). Less guidance was provided by the GP nurses in the SES-sens group, contrary to the implementation instructions.
conclusionsFrom a public health point of view, it is good news that a substantial number of primary care patients with a lower SES level used the implemented e-health intervention. It is also positive that an all-SES implementation strategy performed well, and even outperformed a SES-sensitive strategy. However, this was an unexpected finding, warranting further research into tailoring implementation strategies of e-health interventions towards specific target groups in the primary care setting.
trial registrationNetherlands Trial Register, identifier: NL6595 , registered on 12 November 2017.
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.