ArticleJournal of clinical psychology in medical settings2026
Practice Members' Perspectives on the Implementation of Colorado Integrated Behavioral Health Plus (CIBH +).
Article in Journal of clinical psychology in medical settings, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Using the Hybrid Community Care Model to Examine Implementation Domains in Rural Behavioral Health: Exploratory Pilot Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Integrated Behavioral Health is a key solution in addressing significant problems of access and quality of care. This study assessed practice members' perspectives on the feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness of an integrated care model called Colorado Integrated Behavioral Health Plus (CIBH +) in a large integrated health system. Seven family medicine practices implemented CIBH + . Practice members completed surveys regarding feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness (analyzed with descriptive statistics) and semi-structured interviews (analyzed using a grounded theory hermeneutic editing approach). A total of 156 practice members responded to the survey (62% response rate) and 46 participated in interviews (78% response rate). Respondents indicated high levels of agreement about the perceived feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness of CIBH + . Qualitative themes included: (1) observing the benefits to patients and comprehensive team care reinforced the value of integrating care; (2) supports from teamwork, leadership, and telehealth facilitated implementation; and (3) limitations from role clarity, staffing, space, telehealth, and lack of long-term care options remained challenging for implementation. Identifying the key features of CIBH + may make practical implementation in other settings more feasible to implement and acceptable for patients and care teams to use.
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.