Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37091699›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2023

Therapist perceptions of the implementation of a new screening procedure using the ItFits-toolkit in an iCBT routine care clinic: A mixed-methods study using the consolidated framework for implementation research.

Kristine Tarp, Søren Lange Nielsen, Trine Theresa Holmberg, Caroline Høier Dalsgaard, Simone Borkner, Helene Skaarnes, Esben Kjems Jensen, Jordi Piera-Jiménez, Christiaan Vis, Kim Mathiasen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 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
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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, 4 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 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Kristine TarpResearch Unit for Digital Psychiatry, Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Søren Lange NielsenCentre for Digital Psychiatry, Mental Health Services in the Region of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Trine Theresa HolmbergCentre for Digital Psychiatry, Mental Health Services in the Region of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Caroline Høier DalsgaardCentre for Digital Psychiatry, Mental Health Services in the Region of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Simone BorknerCentre for Digital Psychiatry, Mental Health Services in the Region of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Helene SkaarnesCentre for Digital Psychiatry, Mental Health Services in the Region of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Esben Kjems JensenResearch Unit for Digital Psychiatry, Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Jordi Piera-JiménezCatalan Health Service, Barcelona, Spain.
Christiaan VisClinical, Neuro- & Developmental Psychology, Faculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences, VU Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Kim MathiasenResearch Unit for Digital Psychiatry, Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Mental Health Services · DKUniversity of Southern Denmark · DKCatalan Society of Family and Community Medicine · ESHaukeland University Hospital · NORegion of Southern Denmark · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: This study investigates the implementation of a new, more automated screening procedure using the ItFits-toolkit in the online clinic, Internet Psychiatry (iPsych) (www.internetpsykiatrien.dk), delivering guided iCBT for mild to moderate anxiety and depressive disorders. The study focuses on how the therapists experienced the process. Methods: Qualitative data were collected from semi-structured individual interviews with seven therapists from iPsych. The interviews were conducted using an interview guide with questions based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Quantitative data on the perceived level of normalization were collected from iPsych therapists, administrative staff, and off-site professionals in contact with the target demographic at 10-time points throughout the implementation. Results: The therapists experienced an improvement in the intake procedure. They reported having more relevant information about the patients to be used during the assessment and the treatment; they liked the new design better; there was a better alignment of expectations between patients and therapists; the patient group was generally a better fit for treatment after implementation; and more of the assessed patients were included in the program. The quantitative data support the interview data and describe a process of normalization that increases over time. Discussion: The ItFits-toolkit appears to have been an effective mediator of the implementation process. The therapists were aided in the process of change, resulting in an enhanced ability to target the patients who can benefit from the treatment program, less expenditure of time on the wrong population, and more satisfied therapists.

Indexed as

anxietyCFIRdepressioniCBTimplementationNPTtherapist perceptions

Identifiers

PMID37091699
PMCPMC10117952
OpenAlexW4362671643

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.