Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42120772›Full record

ArticleCommunity mental health journal2026

The Impact of Government-Funded Brief Psychological Interventions on Mental Health: A Longitudinal Evaluation of the Italian "Psychological Bonus" Policy.

Ilaria Maria Antonietta Benzi, Antonino La Tona, Cristina Zarbo, Nicola Carone, Marianna Liotti, Rossana Smeriglio, Angelo Compare, Santo Di Nuovo, David Lazzari, Elisabetta Camussi and 3 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Community mental health journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Ilaria Maria Antonietta BenziUniversity of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy. ilaria.benzi@unimib.it.
Antonino La TonaUniversity of Bergamo, Bergamo, Italy.
Cristina ZarboUniversity of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy.
Nicola CaroneUniversity of Rome Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy.
Marianna LiottiSapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Rossana SmeriglioUniversity of Catania, Catania, Italy.
Angelo CompareUniversity of Bergamo, Bergamo, Italy.
Santo Di NuovoUniversity of Catania, Catania, Italy.
David LazzariOsservatorio sul Benessere Psicologico e Salute, Rome, Italy.
Elisabetta CamussiUniversity of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy.
Vittorio LingiardiSapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Gianluca Lo CocoUniversity of Palermo, Palermo, Italy.
Laura Antonia Lucia ParolinUniversity of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic amplified an ongoing mental health crisis in Europe. In response, the Italian Ministry of Health introduced the "Psychological Bonus," a government-funded initiative aimed at improving access to brief psychological interventions (BPIs). This longitudinal study examined the effectiveness of these publicly funded BPIs in reducing psychological distress, anxiety, and depression among a large sample of Italian patients, while also exploring the moderating roles of therapy continuation, therapist orientation, and treatment setting. A total of 1,541 participants were assessed at baseline (T0), post-treatment (T1), and six-month follow-up (T2) using the CORE-10, GAD-7, and PHQ-9. Longitudinal trajectories were analyzed using Linear Mixed Models, controlling for age, sex, and session count. Separate models examined the impact of therapy continuation, therapist orientation, and treatment setting (in-person, online, or blended). Significant reductions in psychological distress, depression, and anxiety from baseline to post-treatment were maintained at follow-up, with effect sizes ranging from medium to large across outcomes and timepoints (d = 0.54-0.80). A small but significant attenuation of psychological distress gains was observed between post-treatment and follow-up, while depression and anxiety scores remained stable. Continuation of therapy after the funded sessions did not significantly moderate symptom trajectories. Likewise, no significant differences in change trajectories emerged across therapist theoretical orientations or treatment settings. The findings provide strong support for the effectiveness of the "Psychological Bonus" as a publicly funded BPI, helpful in addressing widespread mental health needs across different therapeutic and delivery models, representing a promising model for mental health policy.

Indexed as

Access to careBrief psychological interventions (BPIs)Longitudinal evaluationMental health policyPublic mental healthTelepsychologyTreatment effectiveness

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.