Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37078520›Full record

Trial reportThe British journal of psychiatry : the journal of mental science2023

The effectiveness of a primary care-based collaborative care model to improve quality of life in people with severe mental illness: PARTNERS2 cluster randomised controlled trial.

Richard Byng, Siobhan Creanor, Benjamin Jones, Joanne Hosking, Humera Plappert, Sheriden Bevan, Nicky Britten, Michael Clark, Linda Davies, Julia Frost and 15 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialEquivalence Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in The British journal of psychiatry : the journal of mental science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Collaborative care approaches for people with severe mental illness.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. 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

25 authors at 14 institutions in 1 country.

Richard ByngCommunity and Primary Care Research Group, University of Plymouth, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7411-9467
Siobhan CreanorDepartment of Health and Community Sciences, University of Exeter, UK.
Benjamin JonesDepartment of Health and Community Sciences, University of Exeter, UK.
Joanne HoskingCommunity and Primary Care Research Group, University of Plymouth, UK.
Humera PlappertInstitute for Mental Health, University of Birmingham, UK.
Sheriden BevanBirmingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, UK.
Nicky BrittenDepartment of Health and Community Sciences, University of Exeter, UK.
Michael ClarkCare Policy and Evaluation Centre, London School of Economics and Political Science, UK.
Linda DaviesDivision of Population Health, University of Manchester, UK.
Julia FrostDepartment of Health and Community Sciences, University of Exeter, UK.
Linda GaskDivision of Population Health, University of Manchester, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7918-3967
Bliss GibbonsInstitute for Mental Health, Coventry and Warwickshire Partnership NHS Trust, UK.
John GibsonThe McPin Foundation, UK.
Pollyanna HardyNational Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, Oxford Population Health, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, UK.
Charley Hobson-MerrettCommunity and Primary Care Research Group, University of Plymouth, UK.
Peter HuxleySchool of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Bangor, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5152-8030
Alison JefferyCommunity and Primary Care Research Group, University of Plymouth, UK.
Steven MarwahaInstitute for Mental Health, University of Birmingham, UK; and Institute for Mental Health, Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0303-9942
Tim RawcliffeLancashire Care NHS Trust, UK.
Siobhan ReillyCentre for Applied Dementia Studies, Faculty of Health Studies, University of Bradford, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4372-4415
Debra RichardsCommunity and Primary Care Research Group, University of Plymouth, UK.
Ruth SayersThe McPin Foundation, UK.
Lynsey WilliamsCommunity and Primary Care Research Group, University of Plymouth, UK.
Vanessa PinfoldThe McPin Foundation, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3007-8805
Maximillian BirchwoodHealth Sciences, University of Warwick, UK.
University of Plymouth · GBUniversity of Exeter · GBMcPin Foundation · GBUniversity of Manchester · GBBangor University · GBBirmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust · GBCancer Research UK Clinical Trials Unit · GBCoventry and Warwickshire Partnership NHS Trust · GBLancashire Care NHS Foundation Trust · GBLondon School of Economics and Political Science · GBUniversity of Birmingham · GBUniversity of Bradford · GBUniversity of Oxford · GBUniversity of Warwick · GB

Funding

Department of Health NIHR200625Department of Health RP-PG-0611-20004
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIndividuals living with severe mental illness can have significant emotional, physical and social challenges. Collaborative care combines clinical and organisational components.

aimsWe tested whether a primary care-based collaborative care model (PARTNERS) would improve quality of life for people with diagnoses of schizophrenia, bipolar disorder or other psychoses, compared with usual care.

methodWe conducted a general practice-based, cluster randomised controlled superiority trial. Practices were recruited from four English regions and allocated (1:1) to intervention or control. Individuals receiving limited input in secondary care or who were under primary care only were eligible. The 12-month PARTNERS intervention incorporated person-centred coaching support and liaison work. The primary outcome was quality of life as measured by the Manchester Short Assessment of Quality of Life (MANSA).

resultsWe allocated 39 general practices, with 198 participants, to the PARTNERS intervention (20 practices, 116 participants) or control (19 practices, 82 participants). Primary outcome data were available for 99 (85.3%) intervention and 71 (86.6%) control participants. Mean change in overall MANSA score did not differ between the groups (intervention: 0.25, s.d. 0.73; control: 0.21, s.d. 0.86; estimated fully adjusted between-group difference 0.03, 95% CI -0.25 to 0.31;

conclusionsThere was no evidence of a difference in quality of life, as measured with the MANSA, between those receiving the PARTNERS intervention and usual care. Shifting care to primary care was not associated with increased adverse outcomes.

Indexed as

Bipolar DisorderMental DisordersPsychotic DisordersSchizophreniaCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansQuality of Lifebipolar affective disordersoutcome studiesPrimary carerandomised controlled trialschizophrenia

Identifiers

PMID37078520
PMCPMC10201334
OpenAlexW4366463310

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.