ArticleBMJ open2025
Protocol for the process evaluation for a cluster randomised controlled trial evaluating primary school-based screening and intervention delivery for childhood anxiety problems.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAnxiety problems are prevalent in childhood and, without intervention, can persist into adulthood. Effective evidence-based interventions for childhood anxiety disorders exist, specifically cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) in a range of formats. However, only a small proportion of children successfully access and receive treatment. Conducting mental health screening in schools and integrating evidence-based interventions for childhood anxiety problems may be an effective way to ensure support reaches children in need. The Identifying Child Anxiety Through Schools-Identification to Intervention (iCATS i2i) trial involves screening for childhood anxiety problems and offering a brief online parent-led CBT intervention. This paper presents the protocol for the process evaluation of the iCATS i2i trial, which aims to examine the implementation and acceptability of the study procedures, the mechanisms of change and whether any external factors had an impact on procedure engagement or delivery. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This process evaluation will use both quantitative and qualitative methods to evaluate the implementation and acceptability of and barriers/facilitators to engagement and delivery of the iCATS screening/intervention procedures. Quantitative data sources will include opt-out and completion rates of baseline measures and usage analytics extracted from the online intervention platform. Qualitative interviews will be conducted with children, parents, school staff, iCATS i2i clinicians and researchers delivering study procedures. The Medical Research Council framework for process evaluations will guide study design and analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has received ethical approval from the University of Oxford Research Ethics Committee (R66068_RE003). Findings from the study will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications in academic journals, conferences, digital and social media platforms and stakeholder meetings.
trial registrationISRCTN76119074.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.