ArticleInternational journal of mental health systems2025
Evaluating provider training in stepped care 2.0 and one-at-a-time services among mental health and addiction providers.
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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundStepped Care 2.0 (SC2.0) and One-at-a-Time (OAAT) approaches can help address challenges related to accessing effective addiction and mental health (A&MH) services. OAAT services, available by walk-in or appointment, were implemented in New Brunswick (NB) as the first step in developing a provincial stepped care framework in alignment with NB's A&MH action plan. This study sought to evaluate the impact of online training courses in SC2.0 and OAAT service delivery on providers' knowledge, readiness, and capabilities to implement OAAT services in A&MH clinics, within the broader context of the provincial SC2.0 model.
methodsProviders employed with A&MH services (e.g., social workers, nurses, psychologists) across NB completed asynchronous training courses in SC2.0 and OAAT services as part of a provincial implementation initiative. Over 400 providers volunteered to complete questionnaires related to this training (N = 401). Knowledge acquisition questionnaires were developed based on SC2.0 course content and administered pre- and post-training. Providers also completed a post-training knowledge acquisition questionnaire on OAAT services. Providers completed questionnaires on acceptability, appropriateness and feasibility of training courses, and self-efficacy post-training. Qualitative interviews were conducted with 28 providers to further understand their experiences with training courses in SC2.0 (n = 12) and OAAT services (n = 16).
resultsMean percentage of correct responses at post-course for SC2.0 and OAAT services was 67.2% (SD = 15.9%) and 75.7% (SD = 15.7%), respectively. A modest, but significant, increase in knowledge of SC2.0 was observed post-training. Courses were deemed acceptable, appropriate and feasible, and resulted in favorable outcome expectancies. Moreover, providers reported modest self-efficacy to enact SC2.0 following training. Providers made recommendations to receive additional resources and training in SC2.0 and OAAT services to further enhance confidence to integrate key principles into practice.
conclusionsAsynchronous training courses in SC2.0 and OAAT services supported the provincial practice change initiative in NB. In line with the COM-B model of behavior change, course barriers and facilitators were identified and provide insights into ways in which these courses, and related implementation projects involving training healthcare professionals, could be adapted to help create and sustain change.
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.