Trial reportBMC psychiatry2026
DIALOG+ for service users with chronic depression: a cluster-randomised controlled feasibility trial and qualitative evaluation.
Trial report in BMC psychiatry, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMany individuals who experience depression go on to develop chronic forms of this disorder yet research on tailored treatments is lacking. DIALOG +, a technology-assisted and resource-oriented intervention, may be one potential solution. This study aimed to assess the feasibility and acceptability of conducting a definitive cluster randomized controlled trial (cRCT) of DIALOG + for service users with chronic depression.
methodsA mixed-methods feasibility study involving a two-arm cRCT and qualitative evaluation was conducted in community-based mental health care services in South-East England. Service users with a clinical diagnosis of chronic depression (≥ 2 years), and their clinicians, were cluster-randomized to either the intervention (DIALOG +) or an active control (Treatment as Usual + completion of the DIALOG scale) group. Participants were assessed at baseline and 6 months post-randomisation by blinded assessors. The DIALOG + arm participants were interviewed about their experiences. The feasibility of recruitment and retention strategies, eligibility criteria, and selected outcome measures including their estimated variability were all assessed. Acceptability of DIALOG + and fidelity evaluation recording methods were also explored.
resultsThirty-six service users and 11 clinicians were cluster-randomised to the intervention arm (n = 25/8) or the active control arm (n = 11/3). 75% of the target service user sample and 92% of the clinician sample were recruited. The service user retention rate was 77.8%. Recruitment was affected by organisational-level difficulties, however, all consented and eligible service users were randomised. Eligibility criteria for the subsequent main trial were modified to ensure adequate inclusiveness. The outcome measures used were feasible except for the clinician-rated ones which required replacement. No formal between-group tests were conducted however the results indicated a trend towards increased subjective quality of life (SQOL) and a decrease in depressive symptoms at 6-months in the DIALOG + arm. Qualitative interviews were conducted with 7 service users and 6 clinicians, with data indicating that DIALOG + is acceptable due to the intervention providing increased clarity and focus, and positively impacting on clinical communication. 85.7% of service users indicated they would want to use DIALOG + again in the future.
conclusionsA definitive cRCT is feasible to conduct with some adjustments to the recruitment procedures and materials, eligibility criteria and clinician-rated outcome measures. DIALOG + has a potential to increase SQOL and reduce depressive symptoms for service users with chronic depression.
trial registrationISRCTN16864442 (10.04.2018).
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.