Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37988363›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

Assessing the impact of a comprehensive mental health program on frontline health service workers.

Emily J Ward, Maren S Fragala, Charles E Birse, Matt Hawrilenko, Casey Smolka, Geetu Ambwani, Millard Brown, John H Krystal, Philip R Corlett, Adam Chekroud

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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.

Emily J WardSpring Health, New York, NY, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-2789-2753
Maren S FragalaQuest Diagnostics, Secaucus, NJ, United States of America.
Charles E BirseQuest Diagnostics, Secaucus, NJ, United States of America.
Matt HawrilenkoSpring Health, New York, NY, United States of America.
Casey SmolkaSpring Health, New York, NY, United States of America.
Geetu AmbwaniSpring Health, New York, NY, United States of America.
Millard BrownSpring Health, New York, NY, United States of America.
John H KrystalDepartment of Psychiatry, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, United States of America.
Philip R CorlettDepartment of Psychiatry, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, United States of America.
Adam ChekroudSpring Health, New York, NY, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mental health issues are a growing concern in the workplace, linked to negative outcomes including reduced productivity, increased absenteeism, and increased turnover. Employer-sponsored mental health benefits that are accessible and proactive may help address these concerns. The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to evaluate the impact of a digital mental health benefit (Spring Health) on frontline healthcare service workers' clinical and workplace outcomes. The benefit was sponsored by a national health services company from 2021-2022 and included mental health screening, care navigation, psychotherapy and/or medication management. We hypothesized program use would be associated with improvements in depression and anxiety symptoms, and increased productivity and retention. Participants were employees enrolled in the benefit program, had at least moderate anxiety or depression, at least 1 treatment appointment, and at least 2 outcome assessments. Clinical improvement measures were PHQ-9 scale (range, 0-27) for depression and GAD-7 scale (range, 0-21) for anxiety; workplace measures were employee retention and the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) for functional impairment. A total of 686 participants were included. Participants using the mental health benefit had a 5.60 point (95% CI, 4.40-6.79, d = 1.28) reduction in depression and a 5.48 point (95% CI, 3.88-7.08, d = 1.64) reduction in anxiety across 6 months. 69.9% (95% CI, 61.8%-78.1%) of participants reliably improved (≥5 point change) and 84.1% (95% CI, 78.2%-90.1%) achieved reliable improvement or recovery (<10 points). Participants reported 0.70 (95% CI, 0.26-1.14) fewer workdays per week impacted by mental health issues, corresponding to $3,491 (95% CI, $1305-$5677) salary savings at approximately federal median wage ($50,000). Furthermore, employees using the benefit were retained at 1.58 (95% CI, 1.4-1.76) times the rate of those who did not. Overall, this evaluation suggests that accessible, proactive, and comprehensive mental health benefits for frontline health services workers can lead to positive clinical and workplace outcomes.

Indexed as

Mental HealthWorkplaceAnxietyHumansMass ScreeningRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID37988363
PMCPMC10662717

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.