Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36223980›Full record

SynthesisEvidence-based mental health2022

Can we mitigate the psychological impacts of social isolation using behavioural activation? Long-term results of the UK BASIL urgent public health COVID-19 pilot randomised controlled trial and living systematic review.

Elizabeth Littlewood, Dean McMillan, Carolyn Chew Graham, Della Bailey, Samantha Gascoyne, Claire Sloane, Lauren Burke, Peter Coventry, Suzanne Crosland, Caroline Fairhurst and 22 more

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisRandomized Controlled TrialSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Evidence-based mental health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Defining the Role of the Fire and Rescue Service in Mental Health Support for Older Adults: A Qualitative Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024
    Article
  9. 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

32 authors.

Elizabeth LittlewoodHealth Sciences, University of York, York, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4606-4590
Dean McMillanHealth Sciences, University of York, York, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2901-8410
Carolyn Chew GrahamSchool of Medicine, Keele University, Keele, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9722-9981
Della BaileyHealth Sciences, University of York, York, UK.
Samantha GascoyneHealth Sciences, University of York, York, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7763-2776
Claire SloaneHealth Sciences, University of York, York, UK.
Lauren BurkeHealth Sciences, University of York, York, UK.
Peter CoventryHealth Sciences, University of York, York, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0625-3829
Suzanne CroslandHealth Sciences, University of York, York, UK.
Caroline FairhurstHealth Sciences, University of York, York, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0547-462X
Andrew HenryHealth Sciences, University of York, York, UK.
Catherine HewittHealth Sciences, University of York, York, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0415-3536
Kalpita BairdHealth Sciences, University of York, York, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8472-5698
Eloise RydeHealth Sciences, University of York, York, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4597-7774
Leanne ShearsmithFaculty of Medicine and Health, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6575-0529
Gemma Traviss-TurnerFaculty of Medicine and Health, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1770-6216
Rebecca WoodhouseHealth Sciences, University of York, York, UK.
Judith WebsterResearch and Development Unit, Tees Esk and Wear Valleys NHS Foundation Trust, Darlington, UK.
Nick MeaderFaculty of Medical Sciences, University of Newcastle, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9332-6605
Rachel ChurchillCochrane Common Mental Disorders Group, University of York, York, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1751-0512
Elizabeth EddyFaculty of Health and Life Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Paul HeronHealth Sciences, University of York, York, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3529-5737
Nisha HicklinDepartment of Psychology, Royal Holloway University of London, Egham, UK.
Roz ShafranPPP, University College London Institute of Child Health, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2729-4961
Osvaldo AlmeidaUWA Medical School, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-8689-6199
Andrew CleggFaculty of Medicine and Health, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5972-1097
Tom GentryHealth and Care Policy, Age UK, London, UK.
Andrew HillFaculty of Medicine and Health, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3192-0427
Karina LovellDivision of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8821-895X
Sarah Dexter-SmithResearch and Development Unit, Tees Esk and Wear Valleys NHS Foundation Trust, Darlington, UK.
David EkersHealth Sciences, University of York, York, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3898-3340
Simon GilbodyHealth Sciences, University of York, York, UK simon.gilbody@york.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-8236-6983

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBehavioural and cognitive interventions remain credible approaches in addressing loneliness and depression. There was a need to rapidly generate and assimilate trial-based data during COVID-19.

objectivesWe undertook a parallel pilot RCT of behavioural activation (a brief behavioural intervention) for depression and loneliness (Behavioural Activation in Social Isolation, the BASIL-C19 trial ISRCTN94091479). We also assimilate these data in a living systematic review (PROSPERO CRD42021298788) of cognitive and/or behavioural interventions.

methodsParticipants (≥65 years) with long-term conditions were computer randomised to behavioural activation (n=47) versus care as usual (n=49). Primary outcome was PHQ-9. Secondary outcomes included loneliness (De Jong Scale). Data from the BASIL-C19 trial were included in a metanalysis of depression and loneliness.

findingsThe 12 months adjusted mean difference for PHQ-9 was -0.70 (95% CI -2.61 to 1.20) and for loneliness was -0.39 (95% CI -1.43 to 0.65).The BASIL-C19 living systematic review (12 trials) found short-term reductions in depression (standardised mean difference (SMD)=-0.31, 95% CI -0.51 to -0.11) and loneliness (SMD=-0.48, 95% CI -0.70 to -0.27). There were few long-term trials, but there was evidence of some benefit (loneliness SMD=-0.20, 95% CI -0.40 to -0.01; depression SMD=-0.20, 95% CI -0.47 to 0.07). DISCUSSION: We delivered a pilot trial of a behavioural intervention targeting loneliness and depression; achieving long-term follow-up. Living meta-analysis provides strong evidence of short-term benefit for loneliness and depression for cognitive and/or behavioural approaches. A fully powered BASIL trial is underway. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Scalable behavioural and cognitive approaches should be considered as population-level strategies for depression and loneliness on the basis of a living systematic review.

Indexed as

Behavior TherapyCOVID-19Social IsolationDepressionHumansPilot ProjectsPublic HealthUnited KingdomAdult psychiatryDepression & mood disorders

Identifiers

PMID36223980
PMCPMC9811092

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.