Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36669846›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2023

Evaluating the implementation and impact of a new model of care for integrating children and young people's acute mental healthcare in a paediatric setting: a protocol for a realist, mixed-methods approach.

Michaela Otis, Susan Barber, Stuart Green Hofer, Jean Straus, Michelle Kay, Dougal S Hargreaves, Benedict Hayhoe, Nana Anokye, Laura Lennox, Dasha Nicholls

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Michaela OtisDepartment of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London School of Public Health, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2690-9867
Susan BarberDepartment of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London School of Public Health, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5742-9639
Stuart Green HoferDepartment of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London School of Public Health, London, UK stuart.green@imperial.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-9967-0383
Jean StrausNIHR ARC Northwest London, London, UK.
Michelle KayNIHR ARC Northwest London, London, UK.
Dougal S HargreavesNIHR ARC Northwest London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0722-9847
Benedict HayhoeDepartment of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London School of Public Health, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2645-6191
Nana AnokyeNIHR ARC Northwest London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3615-344X
Laura LennoxDepartment of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London School of Public Health, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8991-1702
Dasha NichollsNIHR ARC Northwest London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7257-6605
North West London Pathology · GB

Funding

Department of Health
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe mental health of children and young people in the UK has been declining and has continued to worsen throughout the pandemic, leading to an increase in mental health-related emergencies. In response, the Best for You programme was developed as a new service designed to integrate mental healthcare for children and young people between acute hospital and community services. The programme is comprised of four new services: a rapid assessment young people's centre with dual-trained staff, a co-located day service offering family-based care,a digital hub, designed to integrate with the fourth element of the model, namely community support and mental health services. This evaluation protocol aims to assess the development, implementation and outcomes of the Best for You programme and develops a scalable model that could be implemented in other parts of the National Health Service (NHS). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This mixed-methods realist evaluation aims to delineate the components of the system to assess their interdependent relationships within a wider context. Data collection will include interviews, participant observations, focus groups and the collection of local quantitative healthcare data. The research will be conducted across four phases. Phase 1-captures the development of the underlying programme theory. Phase 2-a process evaluation testing the programme theory. Phase 3- an outcome and economic evaluation. Phase 4-consolidation of learning from phases 1-3 to identify barriers, facilitators and wider contextual factors that have shaped implementation drawing on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval for the evaluation was received from the NHS local ethics committee. Embedded within the evaluation is a formative review to feedback and share learning with stakeholders to scale-up the programme. Findings from this study will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals as well as presentations to be useful to service user organisations and networks.

Indexed as

Mental Health ServicesState MedicineAdolescentChildDelivery of Health CareHealth FacilitiesHumansMental HealthChild & adolescent psychiatryEating disordersHealth policyMENTAL HEALTHOrganisation of health servicesPaediatric A&E and ambulatory care

Identifiers

PMID36669846
PMCPMC9872460
OpenAlexW4317686103

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.