Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39135057›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2024

Exploring the acceptability, barriers, and facilitators to psychosis screening in the integrated behavioral health primary care setting: a qualitative study.

Mark Savill, Rachel L Loewy, Sarah Gobrial, Julianna Kirkpatrick, A Jonathan Porteus, Tyler A Lesh, J Daniel Ragland, Tara A Niendam, Cameron S Carter

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2024. 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
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  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

9 authors.

Mark SavillUniversity of California Davis, Sacramento, USA. msavill@ucdavis.edu.
Rachel L LoewyUniversity of California San Francisco, San Francisco, USA.
Sarah GobrialUniversity of California Davis, Sacramento, USA.
Julianna KirkpatrickUniversity of California Davis, Sacramento, USA.
A Jonathan PorteusWellSpace Health, Sacramento, USA.
Tyler A LeshUniversity of California Davis, Sacramento, USA.
J Daniel RaglandUniversity of California Davis, Sacramento, USA.
Tara A NiendamUniversity of California Davis, Sacramento, USA.
Cameron S CarterUniversity of California Davis, Sacramento, USA.

Funding

Psychology Training in Alcohol Research (PTAR)T32AA007455 · NIAAA · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI MARY E. LARIMER · 1985 to 2026
$11.4M
NIAAA NIH HHS T32 AA007455
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA longer duration of untreated psychosis (DUP) is associated with poorer treatment outcomes. Screening for psychosis spectrum disorders in the primary care setting could help support the earlier detection and treatment of individuals in need. However, the acceptability of screening for psychosis in this setting as part of routine care is currently unknown.

methodsWe conducted a qualitative interview study with providers and service users who participated in an early psychosis screening program conducted in an integrated behavioral health primary care (IBH-PC) setting. Interviews were recruited from one of eight WellSpace Federally Qualified Health Center IBH-PC clinics in the Sacramento, CA area. Transcripts of the recorded interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis.

resultsIn total, 12 providers and eight service users participated in the interviews. Most service user and provider participants were supportive of psychosis screening in an IBH-PC setting, but not as part of the general practitioner consultation due to the brief, non-behavioral health nature of many of the appointments, and the expected low prevalence of psychosis in this population. The support of leadership, adequate training and support, staff turnover, and organizational changes were all seen to impact the successful implementation of the program. Different barriers and facilitators were considered important at each stage of the process from introducing the screening procedures to service users; to determining when, where, and how to screen; and how to effectively manage the referral and post-referral stages.

conclusionsDespite the additional challenges of screening in an IBH-PC setting relative to secondary mental health services, the process was considered acceptable and feasible to providers and service users. Services that plan to conduct psychosis screening in their clinics need to consider the challenges and their potential solutions to implementation at each stage of the screening process.

Indexed as

Mass ScreeningPrimary Health CarePsychotic DisordersQualitative ResearchAdultAttitude of Health PersonnelDelivery of Health Care, IntegratedFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMental Health ServicesMiddle AgedPatient Acceptance of Health CareClinical high-risk syndromePathways to carePrimary careProdromal questionnaire – briefQualitative interviewsSchizophreniaScreening

Identifiers

PMID39135057
PMCPMC11321011

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.