ArticleDiscover health systems2026
A mixed methods exploration of mental health pathways and treatment as usual for young people experiencing depression in the United Kingdom.
Article in Discover health systems, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Epidemiological data indicate that the prevalence of depression among young people (YP) is increasing. Although evidence-based interventions are effective for many, 20 to 40% fail, and relapse is common. This study focused on second-line treatments. Modifying psychological processes that predispose individuals to treatment failure or relapse necessitates the development of interventions, but their evaluation depends on a clear understanding of current practice to enable meaningful comparison and assessment of effectiveness. We explored treatment as usual (TAU) for YP receiving support for depression in a two-site pilot, feasibility trial comparing Mindfulness for Adolescents and Carers (MAC) and TAU against TAU in UK Child & Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS). Qualitative data were collected via interviews with senior managers and case-managing clinicians. Quantitative data were gathered through Treatment Recording Sheets completed by clinicians and a clinical service audit. Data were synthesised across sites to provide a comprehensive description of TAU, informing the design of a future definitive trial of MAC. Despite site-level variation in service delivery, key components and processes of CAMHS TAU were identified. Typical pathways included referral and intake; waiting/supportive provision; first- and second-line treatment/s; discharge and re-referral; and crisis support. Care coordination emerged as the most common second-line provision and was provided to YP in both trial arms. Participants received varied combinations of support; those allocated to MAC received less CAMHS input than those allocated to TAU. There is substantial variability in service provision for YP experiencing depression. Future studies should compare treatment plus care coordination with TAU. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s44250-026-00412-0.
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.