Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37330460›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2023

Developing a framework for evaluation: a Theory of Change for complex workplace mental health interventions.

Fotini Tsantila, Evelien Coppens, Hans De Witte, Kahar Abdulla, Benedikt L Amann, Ella Arensman, Birgit Aust, Johanna Creswell-Smith, Luigia D'Alessandro, Lars De Winter and 13 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

23 authors at 16 institutions in 14 countries.

Fotini TsantilaLUCAS, Centre for Care Research and Consultancy, KU Leuven, 3000, Louvain, Belgium. fotini.tsantila@kuleuven.be.
Evelien CoppensLUCAS, Centre for Care Research and Consultancy, KU Leuven, 3000, Louvain, Belgium.
Hans De WitteResearch Group Work, Organizational and Personnel Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences- O2L/WOPP KU Leuven, Louvain, Belgium.
Kahar AbdullaEuropean Alliance Against Depression, Leipzig, Germany.
Benedikt L AmannCentre Fòrum Research Unit, Institute of Neuropsychiatry and Addiction (INAD), Parc de Salut Mar, Hospital del Mar Medical Research Institute (IMIM), Barcelona, CIBERSAM, Spain.
Ella ArensmanSchool of Public Health, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.
Birgit AustNational Research Centre for the Working Environment, 2100, Copenhagen, DK, Denmark.
Johanna Creswell-SmithFinnish Institute for Health and Welfare (THL) Equality Unit - Mental Health Team, Helsinki, Finland.
Luigia D'AlessandroInternational Association for Suicide Prevention (IASP), 5221 Wisconsin Avenue NW, Washington DC, 20015, USA.
Lars De WinterPhrenos Center of Expertise, Da Costakade 45, 3521 VS, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Asmae DoukaniFaculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London, UK.
Naim FanajMental Health Center Prizren, Prizren, Kosovo, USA.
Birgit GreinerSchool of Public Health, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.
Eve GriffinSchool of Public Health, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.
Caleb LeducSchool of Public Health, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.
Margaret MaxwellNursing, Midwifery and Allied Health Professions Research Unit, University of Stirling, Stirling, UK.
Cliodhna O' ConnorNational Suicide Research Foundation, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.
Charlotte PatersonNursing, Midwifery and Allied Health Professions Research Unit, University of Stirling, Stirling, UK.
György PureblInstitute of Behavioral Sciences, Semmelweis University, 1085, Budapest, Hungary.
Hanna ReichGerman Depression Foundation, 04109, Leipzig, Germany.
Victoria RossAustralian Institute for Suicide Research and Prevention, School of Applied Psychology, Griffith University, Brisbane, QLD, 4122, Australia.
Jaap Van WeeghelPhrenos Center of Expertise, Da Costakade 45, 3521 VS, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Chantal Van AudenhoveLUCAS, Centre for Care Research and Consultancy, KU Leuven, 3000, Louvain, Belgium.
KU Leuven · BEUniversity College Cork · IENational Suicide Research Foundation · IEUniversity of Stirling · GBAlma Mater Europaea · SIAmerican Foundation for Suicide Prevention · USEuropean Alliance Against Depression · DEFinnish Institute for Health and Welfare · FIGoethe University Frankfurt · DEGriffith University · AUNational Research Centre for the Working Environment · DKNorth-West University · ZAPompeu Fabra University · ESSemmelweis University · HUTilburg University · NLUniversity of London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is a gap between the necessity of effective mental health interventions in the workplace and the availability of evidence-based information on how to evaluate them. The available evidence outlines that mental health interventions should follow integrated approaches combining multiple components related to different levels of change. However, there is a lack of robust studies on how to evaluate multicomponent workplace interventions which target a variety of outcomes at different levels taking into account the influence of different implementation contexts.

methodWe use the MENTUPP project as a research context to develop a theory-driven approach to facilitate the evaluation of complex mental health interventions in occupational settings and to provide a comprehensive rationale of how these types of interventions are expected to achieve change. We used a participatory approach to develop a ToC involving a large number of the project team representing multiple academic backgrounds exploiting in tandem the knowledge from six systematic reviews and results from a survey among practitioners and academic experts in the field of mental health in SMEs.

resultsThe ToC revealed four long-term outcomes that we assume MENTUPP can achieve in the workplace: 1) improved mental wellbeing and reduced burnout, 2) reduced mental illness, 3) reduced mental illness-related stigma, and 4) reduced productivity losses. They are assumed to be reached through six proximate and four intermediate outcomes according to a specific chronological order. The intervention consists of 23 components that were chosen based on specific rationales to achieve change on four levels (employee, team, leader, and organization).

conclusionsThe ToC map provides a theory of how MENTUPP is expected to achieve its anticipated long-term outcomes through intermediate and proximate outcomes assessing alongside contextual factors which will facilitate the testing of hypotheses. Moreover, it allows for a structured approach to informing the future selection of outcomes and related evaluation measures in either subsequent iterations of complex interventions or other similarly structured programs. Hence, the resulting ToC can be employed by future research as an example for the development of a theoretical framework to evaluate complex mental health interventions in the workplace.

Indexed as

Burnout, ProfessionalMental DisordersHumansMental HealthWorkplaceComplex interventionsEvaluationImplementationIntervention developmentMedical Research Council frameworkMENTUPPOrganizational interventionsTheory of Change, Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs)Workplace-based mental health/health interventions

Identifiers

PMID37330460
PMCPMC10276374
OpenAlexW4381095119

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.