ArticleInternational journal of mental health systems2025
Evaluating the effectiveness of crisis support spaces in Queensland, Australia: a mixed-methods study.
Article in International journal of mental health systems, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSafe Spaces offer a person-centred, non-clinical and welcoming place for adults experiencing a mental health crisis to seek support as an alternative to presenting to the Emergency Department (ED). The aim of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness of Queensland Health’s Crisis Support Spaces (CSS), which are a hospital-based Safe Space service that has been piloted in the state of Queensland in Australia.
methodsThe research employed a mixed-methods design. Retrospective, de-identified program data was analysed from 2,235 consumers who accessed a CSS in Queensland during the period of 23/01/2021 to 31/10/2023. Outcome variables were computed using data from Queensland Health’s Consumer Integrated Mental Health and Addiction (CIMHA) and Emergency Data Collection (EDC) datasets. Within-groups t-tests were used to analyse pre- to post- intervention changes in psychological distress ratings, number of mental health related ED presentations and number of mental health related hospital admissions. In addition, 78 semi-structured interviews were undertaken with CSS consumers and carers, CSS staff and broader mental health system staff; these were analysed using applied thematic analysis.
resultsConsumers experienced a statistically significant, large sized reduction in psychological distress ratings at post-intervention (mean difference = -2.9; p <.001; d = 1.30). A statistically significant, large sized reduction was also observed in the number of mental health related hospital interventions at 6-months post-intervention for those consumers with a prior history of inpatient admissions (mean difference = -1.0; p <.001; d = 0.80). Furthermore, a statistically significant, small sized reduction was observed in mental health related emergency department (ED) presentations at 6-months post- intervention for those consumers with a prior history of ED presentations (mean difference = -0.8; p <.001; d = 0.37). Qualitative data provided insights into potential mechanisms through which the service may achieve its intended outcomes (e.g., providing a safe environment for consumers to de-escalate their psychological distress, teaching consumers skills to self-manage their mental health).
conclusionsThe findings of this study provide mixed-methods evidence supportive of the effectiveness of CSS in helping consumers reduce their psychological distress and preventing mental health related ED presentations and hospital admissions.
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.