Clinical judgement, case complexity and symptom scores as predictors of outcome in depression: an exploratory analysis
Clinical guidelines for depression in adults recommend the use of outcome measures and stepped care models in routine care. Such measures are based on symptom severity, but response to treatment is likely to also be influenced by personal and contextual factors. This observational study of a routine...
Saved in:
Published in | BMC psychiatry Vol. 20; no. 1; pp. 125 - 11 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
England
BioMed Central Ltd
16.03.2020
BioMed Central BMC |
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
ISSN | 1471-244X 1471-244X |
DOI | 10.1186/s12888-020-02532-0 |
Cover
Loading…
Abstract | Clinical guidelines for depression in adults recommend the use of outcome measures and stepped care models in routine care. Such measures are based on symptom severity, but response to treatment is likely to also be influenced by personal and contextual factors. This observational study of a routine clinical sample sought to examine the extent to which "symptom severity measures" and "complexity measures" assess different aspects of patient experience, and how they might relate to clinical outcomes, including disengagement from treatment.
Subjects with symptoms of depression (with or without comorbid anxiety) were recruited from people referred to an established Primary Care Mental Health Team using a stepped care model. Each participant completed three baseline symptom measures (the Personal Health Questionnaire (PHQ), Generalised Anxiety Disorder questionnaire (GAD) and Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation (CORE-10)), and two assessments of "case complexity" (the Minnesota-Edinburgh Complexity Assessment Measure (MECAM) and a local complexity assessment). Clinician perception of likely completion of treatment and patient recovery was also assessed. Outcome measures were drop out and clinical improvement on the PHQ.
298 subjects were recruited to the study, of whom 258 had a sufficient dataset available for analysis. Data showed that the three measures of symptom severity used in this study (PHQ, GAD and CORE-10) seemed to be measuring distinct characteristics from those associated with the measures of case complexity (MECAM, previous and current problem count). Higher symptom severity scores were correlated with improved outcomes at the end of treatment, but there was no association between outcome and complexity measures. Clinicians could predict participant drop-out from care with some accuracy, but had no ability to predict outcome from treatment.
These results highlight the extent to which drop-out complicates recovery from depression with or without anxiety in real-world settings, and the need to consider other factors beyond symptom severity in planning care. The findings are discussed in relation to a growing body of literature investigating prognostic indicators in the context of models of collaborative care for depression. |
---|---|
AbstractList | Clinical guidelines for depression in adults recommend the use of outcome measures and stepped care models in routine care. Such measures are based on symptom severity, but response to treatment is likely to also be influenced by personal and contextual factors. This observational study of a routine clinical sample sought to examine the extent to which "symptom severity measures" and "complexity measures" assess different aspects of patient experience, and how they might relate to clinical outcomes, including disengagement from treatment.
Subjects with symptoms of depression (with or without comorbid anxiety) were recruited from people referred to an established Primary Care Mental Health Team using a stepped care model. Each participant completed three baseline symptom measures (the Personal Health Questionnaire (PHQ), Generalised Anxiety Disorder questionnaire (GAD) and Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation (CORE-10)), and two assessments of "case complexity" (the Minnesota-Edinburgh Complexity Assessment Measure (MECAM) and a local complexity assessment). Clinician perception of likely completion of treatment and patient recovery was also assessed. Outcome measures were drop out and clinical improvement on the PHQ.
298 subjects were recruited to the study, of whom 258 had a sufficient dataset available for analysis. Data showed that the three measures of symptom severity used in this study (PHQ, GAD and CORE-10) seemed to be measuring distinct characteristics from those associated with the measures of case complexity (MECAM, previous and current problem count). Higher symptom severity scores were correlated with improved outcomes at the end of treatment, but there was no association between outcome and complexity measures. Clinicians could predict participant drop-out from care with some accuracy, but had no ability to predict outcome from treatment.
These results highlight the extent to which drop-out complicates recovery from depression with or without anxiety in real-world settings, and the need to consider other factors beyond symptom severity in planning care. The findings are discussed in relation to a growing body of literature investigating prognostic indicators in the context of models of collaborative care for depression. Clinical guidelines for depression in adults recommend the use of outcome measures and stepped care models in routine care. Such measures are based on symptom severity, but response to treatment is likely to also be influenced by personal and contextual factors. This observational study of a routine clinical sample sought to examine the extent to which "symptom severity measures" and "complexity measures" assess different aspects of patient experience, and how they might relate to clinical outcomes, including disengagement from treatment.BACKGROUNDClinical guidelines for depression in adults recommend the use of outcome measures and stepped care models in routine care. Such measures are based on symptom severity, but response to treatment is likely to also be influenced by personal and contextual factors. This observational study of a routine clinical sample sought to examine the extent to which "symptom severity measures" and "complexity measures" assess different aspects of patient experience, and how they might relate to clinical outcomes, including disengagement from treatment.Subjects with symptoms of depression (with or without comorbid anxiety) were recruited from people referred to an established Primary Care Mental Health Team using a stepped care model. Each participant completed three baseline symptom measures (the Personal Health Questionnaire (PHQ), Generalised Anxiety Disorder questionnaire (GAD) and Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation (CORE-10)), and two assessments of "case complexity" (the Minnesota-Edinburgh Complexity Assessment Measure (MECAM) and a local complexity assessment). Clinician perception of likely completion of treatment and patient recovery was also assessed. Outcome measures were drop out and clinical improvement on the PHQ.METHODSSubjects with symptoms of depression (with or without comorbid anxiety) were recruited from people referred to an established Primary Care Mental Health Team using a stepped care model. Each participant completed three baseline symptom measures (the Personal Health Questionnaire (PHQ), Generalised Anxiety Disorder questionnaire (GAD) and Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation (CORE-10)), and two assessments of "case complexity" (the Minnesota-Edinburgh Complexity Assessment Measure (MECAM) and a local complexity assessment). Clinician perception of likely completion of treatment and patient recovery was also assessed. Outcome measures were drop out and clinical improvement on the PHQ.298 subjects were recruited to the study, of whom 258 had a sufficient dataset available for analysis. Data showed that the three measures of symptom severity used in this study (PHQ, GAD and CORE-10) seemed to be measuring distinct characteristics from those associated with the measures of case complexity (MECAM, previous and current problem count). Higher symptom severity scores were correlated with improved outcomes at the end of treatment, but there was no association between outcome and complexity measures. Clinicians could predict participant drop-out from care with some accuracy, but had no ability to predict outcome from treatment.RESULTS298 subjects were recruited to the study, of whom 258 had a sufficient dataset available for analysis. Data showed that the three measures of symptom severity used in this study (PHQ, GAD and CORE-10) seemed to be measuring distinct characteristics from those associated with the measures of case complexity (MECAM, previous and current problem count). Higher symptom severity scores were correlated with improved outcomes at the end of treatment, but there was no association between outcome and complexity measures. Clinicians could predict participant drop-out from care with some accuracy, but had no ability to predict outcome from treatment.These results highlight the extent to which drop-out complicates recovery from depression with or without anxiety in real-world settings, and the need to consider other factors beyond symptom severity in planning care. The findings are discussed in relation to a growing body of literature investigating prognostic indicators in the context of models of collaborative care for depression.CONCLUSIONSThese results highlight the extent to which drop-out complicates recovery from depression with or without anxiety in real-world settings, and the need to consider other factors beyond symptom severity in planning care. The findings are discussed in relation to a growing body of literature investigating prognostic indicators in the context of models of collaborative care for depression. Background Clinical guidelines for depression in adults recommend the use of outcome measures and stepped care models in routine care. Such measures are based on symptom severity, but response to treatment is likely to also be influenced by personal and contextual factors. This observational study of a routine clinical sample sought to examine the extent to which "symptom severity measures" and "complexity measures" assess different aspects of patient experience, and how they might relate to clinical outcomes, including disengagement from treatment. Methods Subjects with symptoms of depression (with or without comorbid anxiety) were recruited from people referred to an established Primary Care Mental Health Team using a stepped care model. Each participant completed three baseline symptom measures (the Personal Health Questionnaire (PHQ), Generalised Anxiety Disorder questionnaire (GAD) and Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation (CORE-10)), and two assessments of "case complexity" (the Minnesota-Edinburgh Complexity Assessment Measure (MECAM) and a local complexity assessment). Clinician perception of likely completion of treatment and patient recovery was also assessed. Outcome measures were drop out and clinical improvement on the PHQ. Results 298 subjects were recruited to the study, of whom 258 had a sufficient dataset available for analysis. Data showed that the three measures of symptom severity used in this study (PHQ, GAD and CORE-10) seemed to be measuring distinct characteristics from those associated with the measures of case complexity (MECAM, previous and current problem count). Higher symptom severity scores were correlated with improved outcomes at the end of treatment, but there was no association between outcome and complexity measures. Clinicians could predict participant drop-out from care with some accuracy, but had no ability to predict outcome from treatment. Conclusions These results highlight the extent to which drop-out complicates recovery from depression with or without anxiety in real-world settings, and the need to consider other factors beyond symptom severity in planning care. The findings are discussed in relation to a growing body of literature investigating prognostic indicators in the context of models of collaborative care for depression. Keywords: Depression, Anxiety, Recovery, Primary care, Outcomes, Drop-out Clinical guidelines for depression in adults recommend the use of outcome measures and stepped care models in routine care. Such measures are based on symptom severity, but response to treatment is likely to also be influenced by personal and contextual factors. This observational study of a routine clinical sample sought to examine the extent to which "symptom severity measures" and "complexity measures" assess different aspects of patient experience, and how they might relate to clinical outcomes, including disengagement from treatment. Subjects with symptoms of depression (with or without comorbid anxiety) were recruited from people referred to an established Primary Care Mental Health Team using a stepped care model. Each participant completed three baseline symptom measures (the Personal Health Questionnaire (PHQ), Generalised Anxiety Disorder questionnaire (GAD) and Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation (CORE-10)), and two assessments of "case complexity" (the Minnesota-Edinburgh Complexity Assessment Measure (MECAM) and a local complexity assessment). Clinician perception of likely completion of treatment and patient recovery was also assessed. Outcome measures were drop out and clinical improvement on the PHQ. 298 subjects were recruited to the study, of whom 258 had a sufficient dataset available for analysis. Data showed that the three measures of symptom severity used in this study (PHQ, GAD and CORE-10) seemed to be measuring distinct characteristics from those associated with the measures of case complexity (MECAM, previous and current problem count). Higher symptom severity scores were correlated with improved outcomes at the end of treatment, but there was no association between outcome and complexity measures. Clinicians could predict participant drop-out from care with some accuracy, but had no ability to predict outcome from treatment. These results highlight the extent to which drop-out complicates recovery from depression with or without anxiety in real-world settings, and the need to consider other factors beyond symptom severity in planning care. The findings are discussed in relation to a growing body of literature investigating prognostic indicators in the context of models of collaborative care for depression. Abstract Background Clinical guidelines for depression in adults recommend the use of outcome measures and stepped care models in routine care. Such measures are based on symptom severity, but response to treatment is likely to also be influenced by personal and contextual factors. This observational study of a routine clinical sample sought to examine the extent to which “symptom severity measures” and “complexity measures” assess different aspects of patient experience, and how they might relate to clinical outcomes, including disengagement from treatment. Methods Subjects with symptoms of depression (with or without comorbid anxiety) were recruited from people referred to an established Primary Care Mental Health Team using a stepped care model. Each participant completed three baseline symptom measures (the Personal Health Questionnaire (PHQ), Generalised Anxiety Disorder questionnaire (GAD) and Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation (CORE-10)), and two assessments of “case complexity” (the Minnesota-Edinburgh Complexity Assessment Measure (MECAM) and a local complexity assessment). Clinician perception of likely completion of treatment and patient recovery was also assessed. Outcome measures were drop out and clinical improvement on the PHQ. Results 298 subjects were recruited to the study, of whom 258 had a sufficient dataset available for analysis. Data showed that the three measures of symptom severity used in this study (PHQ, GAD and CORE-10) seemed to be measuring distinct characteristics from those associated with the measures of case complexity (MECAM, previous and current problem count). Higher symptom severity scores were correlated with improved outcomes at the end of treatment, but there was no association between outcome and complexity measures. Clinicians could predict participant drop-out from care with some accuracy, but had no ability to predict outcome from treatment. Conclusions These results highlight the extent to which drop-out complicates recovery from depression with or without anxiety in real-world settings, and the need to consider other factors beyond symptom severity in planning care. The findings are discussed in relation to a growing body of literature investigating prognostic indicators in the context of models of collaborative care for depression. |
ArticleNumber | 125 |
Audience | Academic |
Author | Pelosi, A. Wetherall, K. Morrison, J. McConnachie, A. Francq, B. Smith, M. |
Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: M. surname: Smith fullname: Smith, M. – sequence: 2 givenname: B. surname: Francq fullname: Francq, B. – sequence: 3 givenname: A. surname: McConnachie fullname: McConnachie, A. – sequence: 4 givenname: K. surname: Wetherall fullname: Wetherall, K. – sequence: 5 givenname: A. surname: Pelosi fullname: Pelosi, A. – sequence: 6 givenname: J. surname: Morrison fullname: Morrison, J. |
BackLink | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32183799$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed |
BookMark | eNp9kl9r1TAYh4tM3B_9Al5IwBsv7EyatEm8EMZB52DgjYJ3IU3eHHNom5q0Y-fbm56zzZ0hUkJL8rxP8778ToujIQxQFK8JPidENB8SqYQQJa5wXjWtSvysOCGMk7Ji7OfRo-_j4jSlDcaEi5q8KI5pRQTlUp4UN6vOD97oDm1mu4Yehuk9MjoBMqEfO7j10xbpwaK07ccp9CiZECEhndAYwXozhZhQcCjMU64A5AdkIR-l5MPwMZciuB27EHUGF5Putsmnl8Vzp7sEr-7eZ8WPL5-_r76W198ur1YX16WpGzqVYBl11rSkYVLW1uJat5q51lRaSuZ4AxxMTRgx1AjGhSZO0kaKuqqx4ATTs-Jq77VBb9QYfa_jVgXt1W4jxLXScfKmAyWpFg5qKXkjGVjXtoRKxoxxWajbxfVp7xrntgdr8qii7g6khyeD_6XW4UZxvCibLHh3J4jh9wxpUr1PBrpODxDmpCrKhZBcVDyjb5-gmzDHPLwdJSucm2V_qbXODfjBhfxfs0jVRUMEp6JmC3X-Dyo_FnpvcqScz_sHBW8eN_rQ4X1qMlDtARNDShHcA0KwWqKp9tFUOZpqF021jE88KTJ-0lNOSb6O7_5X-gdZSOkD |
CitedBy_id | crossref_primary_10_1002_ansa_202000159 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jad_2023_11_048 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_biopsych_2023_05_024 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_genhosppsych_2022_09_005 crossref_primary_10_2139_ssrn_4175595 |
Cites_doi | 10.1016/j.jad.2017.11.042 10.1002/wps.20306 10.1176/appi.ajp.2008.08071027 10.1192/bjp.bp.114.160978 10.1192/bjp.bp.112.113134 10.1186/s12888-016-0736-6 10.1176/appi.ajp.2011.11020335 10.1136/bmj.l835 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2013.420 10.1192/bjp.bp.116.187773 10.1046/j.1525-1497.2002.10319.x 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2015.1516 10.1192/bjp.bp.109.067116 10.1186/s12888-017-1370-7 10.1186/2050-7283-2-7 10.1186/s12888-016-0819-4 10.1001/archinte.166.10.1092 10.1080/14733145.2012.729069 10.1017/S003329170002105X 10.1186/1472-6963-6-88 10.1007/s00127-010-0317-9 10.4088/JCP.12075tx2c 10.1016/0022-3999(73)90014-7 10.1037/a0022186 10.1056/NEJMp1209500 10.1136/bmj.f540 10.1186/s12888-017-1305-3 10.1001/jama.289.23.3095 10.1002/cpp.383 10.1016/j.jad.2010.04.030 10.1016/j.jad.2009.03.021 10.1001/jama.2013.280038 10.1056/NEJMp1109283 10.1017/S1463423610000228 10.1192/bjp.bp.114.145565 10.3122/jabfm.2017.03.160313 10.1046/j.1525-1497.2001.016009606.x 10.1071/HC16008 10.1192/bjp.bp.106.023655 |
ContentType | Journal Article |
Copyright | COPYRIGHT 2020 BioMed Central Ltd. 2020. This work is licensed under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License. The Author(s) 2020 |
Copyright_xml | – notice: COPYRIGHT 2020 BioMed Central Ltd. – notice: 2020. This work is licensed under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License. – notice: The Author(s) 2020 |
DBID | AAYXX CITATION NPM 3V. 7TK 7X7 7XB 88E 88G 8FI 8FJ 8FK ABUWG AFKRA AZQEC BENPR CCPQU DWQXO FYUFA GHDGH GNUQQ K9. M0S M1P M2M PHGZM PHGZT PIMPY PJZUB PKEHL PPXIY PQEST PQQKQ PQUKI PRINS PSYQQ Q9U 7X8 5PM DOA |
DOI | 10.1186/s12888-020-02532-0 |
DatabaseName | CrossRef PubMed ProQuest Central (Corporate) Neurosciences Abstracts Health & Medical Collection ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016) Medical Database (Alumni Edition) Psychology Database (Alumni) ProQuest Hospital Collection Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition) ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016) ProQuest Central (Alumni) ProQuest Central UK/Ireland ProQuest Central Essentials ProQuest Central ProQuest One Community College ProQuest Central Health Research Premium Collection Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni) ProQuest Central Student ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni) Health & Medical Collection (Alumni) Medical Database Psychology Database ProQuest Central Premium ProQuest One Academic Publicly Available Content Database ProQuest Health & Medical Research Collection ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New) ProQuest One Health & Nursing ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE) ProQuest One Academic ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition ProQuest Central China ProQuest One Psychology ProQuest Central Basic MEDLINE - Academic PubMed Central (Full Participant titles) DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals |
DatabaseTitle | CrossRef PubMed Publicly Available Content Database ProQuest One Psychology ProQuest Central Student ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New) ProQuest Central Essentials ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni) ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition) ProQuest One Community College ProQuest One Health & Nursing ProQuest Central China ProQuest Central ProQuest Health & Medical Research Collection Health Research Premium Collection Health and Medicine Complete (Alumni Edition) ProQuest Central Korea Health & Medical Research Collection ProQuest Central (New) ProQuest Medical Library (Alumni) ProQuest Central Basic ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition ProQuest Hospital Collection Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni) ProQuest Psychology Journals (Alumni) Neurosciences Abstracts ProQuest Hospital Collection (Alumni) ProQuest Health & Medical Complete ProQuest Medical Library ProQuest Psychology Journals ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition ProQuest One Academic ProQuest One Academic (New) ProQuest Central (Alumni) MEDLINE - Academic |
DatabaseTitleList | PubMed MEDLINE - Academic |
Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: DOA name: DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals url: https://www.doaj.org/ sourceTypes: Open Website – sequence: 2 dbid: NPM name: PubMed url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed sourceTypes: Index Database – sequence: 3 dbid: BENPR name: ProQuest Central url: https://www.proquest.com/central sourceTypes: Aggregation Database |
DeliveryMethod | fulltext_linktorsrc |
Discipline | Medicine |
EISSN | 1471-244X |
EndPage | 11 |
ExternalDocumentID | oai_doaj_org_article_93a8fe5997694edfbb13944ccf698ab0 PMC7076946 A618738544 32183799 10_1186_s12888_020_02532_0 |
Genre | Journal Article |
GeographicLocations | United Kingdom |
GeographicLocations_xml | – name: United Kingdom |
GrantInformation_xml | – fundername: ; |
GroupedDBID | --- 0R~ 23N 2WC 53G 5VS 6J9 7X7 88E 8FI 8FJ AAFWJ AAJSJ AASML AAYXX ABDBF ABIVO ABUWG ACGFO ACGFS ACIHN ACPRK ACUHS ADBBV ADRAZ ADUKV AEAQA AENEX AFKRA AFPKN AHBYD AHMBA AHYZX ALIPV ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS AMKLP AMTXH AOIJS AZQEC BAPOH BAWUL BCNDV BENPR BFQNJ BMC BPHCQ BVXVI C6C CCPQU CITATION CS3 DIK DWQXO E3Z EAD EAP EAS EBD EBLON EBS EMB EMK EMOBN ESX F5P FYUFA GNUQQ GROUPED_DOAJ GX1 HMCUK HYE IAO IHR INH INR IPY ITC KQ8 M1P M2M M48 M~E O5R O5S OK1 OVT P2P PGMZT PHGZM PHGZT PIMPY PQQKQ PROAC PSQYO PSYQQ RBZ RNS ROL RPM RSV SMD SOJ SV3 TR2 TUS UKHRP W2D WOQ WOW XSB -A0 3V. ACRMQ ADINQ C24 NPM PMFND 7TK 7XB 8FK K9. PJZUB PKEHL PPXIY PQEST PQUKI PRINS Q9U 7X8 5PM PUEGO |
ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-c563t-ed43fdcb164995dd05aba4fbc2a994f76e7ec5141c3c8478a1f93698525087103 |
IEDL.DBID | M48 |
ISSN | 1471-244X |
IngestDate | Wed Aug 27 01:29:04 EDT 2025 Thu Aug 21 18:12:32 EDT 2025 Fri Jul 11 15:39:30 EDT 2025 Fri Jul 25 10:37:58 EDT 2025 Tue Jun 17 21:02:10 EDT 2025 Tue Jun 10 20:33:01 EDT 2025 Thu Jan 02 23:00:07 EST 2025 Thu Apr 24 23:02:27 EDT 2025 Tue Jul 01 00:26:04 EDT 2025 |
IsDoiOpenAccess | true |
IsOpenAccess | true |
IsPeerReviewed | true |
IsScholarly | true |
Issue | 1 |
Keywords | Drop-out Depression Anxiety Primary care Recovery Outcomes |
Language | English |
License | Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
LinkModel | DirectLink |
MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c563t-ed43fdcb164995dd05aba4fbc2a994f76e7ec5141c3c8478a1f93698525087103 |
Notes | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 14 content type line 23 ObjectType-Undefined-3 |
OpenAccessLink | http://journals.scholarsportal.info/openUrl.xqy?doi=10.1186/s12888-020-02532-0 |
PMID | 32183799 |
PQID | 2379204784 |
PQPubID | 44775 |
PageCount | 11 |
ParticipantIDs | doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_93a8fe5997694edfbb13944ccf698ab0 pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7076946 proquest_miscellaneous_2378897827 proquest_journals_2379204784 gale_infotracmisc_A618738544 gale_infotracacademiconefile_A618738544 pubmed_primary_32183799 crossref_primary_10_1186_s12888_020_02532_0 crossref_citationtrail_10_1186_s12888_020_02532_0 |
ProviderPackageCode | CITATION AAYXX |
PublicationCentury | 2000 |
PublicationDate | 2020-03-16 |
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2020-03-16 |
PublicationDate_xml | – month: 03 year: 2020 text: 2020-03-16 day: 16 |
PublicationDecade | 2020 |
PublicationPlace | England |
PublicationPlace_xml | – name: England – name: London |
PublicationTitle | BMC psychiatry |
PublicationTitleAlternate | BMC Psychiatry |
PublicationYear | 2020 |
Publisher | BioMed Central Ltd BioMed Central BMC |
Publisher_xml | – name: BioMed Central Ltd – name: BioMed Central – name: BMC |
References | M De Venter (2532_CR35) 2013; 55 S Parsons (2532_CR49) 2010 2532_CR10 J Pybis (2532_CR3) 2017; 17 P Chondros (2532_CR41) 2018; 227 2532_CR16 Ronald C. Kessler (2532_CR2) 2003; 289 P Bower (2532_CR31) 2013; 346 RA Bell (2532_CR14) 2002; 17 R Cochrane (2532_CR24) 1973; 17 MJ Barry (2532_CR12) 2012; 366 2532_CR22 2532_CR23 2532_CR20 D Finkelhor (2532_CR45) 2013; 167 RL Spitzer (2532_CR19) 2006; 166 2532_CR28 2532_CR29 KE McPherson (2532_CR46) 2014; 2 KB Angstman (2532_CR42) 2017; 30 B Arroll (2532_CR15) 2016; 8 MH Trivedi (2532_CR9) 2013; 74 WB Stiles (2532_CR4) 2015; 207 K Kroenke (2532_CR17) 2001; 16 T Brugha (2532_CR26) 1985; 15 BT Stegenga (2532_CR44) 2012; 47 M Barkham (2532_CR21) 2013; 13 Michael King (2532_CR43) 2015; 207 EO Lee (2532_CR13) 2013; 368 C Bottomley (2532_CR25) 2010; 196 TA Furukawa (2532_CR37) 2017; 210 2532_CR30 2532_CR5 2532_CR6 MA Bellis (2532_CR47) 2017; 17 J Gunn (2532_CR7) 2006; 6 SR Wisniewski (2532_CR39) 2009; 166 AO Horvath (2532_CR50) 2011; 48 J Okiishi (2532_CR11) 2003; 10 V Nanni (2532_CR36) 2012; 169 P Bower (2532_CR8) 2006; 189 JE Wells (2532_CR33) 2013; 202 A Henzen (2532_CR34) 2016; 16 2532_CR1 LB Dixon (2532_CR51) 2016; 15 D McMillan (2532_CR18) 2010; 127 ES Weitz (2532_CR38) 2015; 72 2532_CR40 N Hepgul (2532_CR32) 2016; 16 SL Hatch (2532_CR27) 2009; 119 RL Kravitz (2532_CR48) 2013; 310 M King (2532_CR52) 2015; 207 |
References_xml | – volume: 227 start-page: 854 year: 2018 ident: 2532_CR41 publication-title: J Affect Disord doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2017.11.042 – volume: 15 start-page: 13 issue: 1 year: 2016 ident: 2532_CR51 publication-title: World Psychiatry doi: 10.1002/wps.20306 – volume: 166 start-page: 599 issue: 5 year: 2009 ident: 2532_CR39 publication-title: Am J Psychiatry doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2008.08071027 – volume: 207 start-page: 93 issue: 2 year: 2015 ident: 2532_CR43 publication-title: British Journal of Psychiatry doi: 10.1192/bjp.bp.114.160978 – volume: 202 start-page: 42 issue: 1 year: 2013 ident: 2532_CR33 publication-title: Br J Psychiatry doi: 10.1192/bjp.bp.112.113134 – ident: 2532_CR23 – volume: 16 start-page: 52 issue: 1 year: 2016 ident: 2532_CR32 publication-title: BMC Psychiatry doi: 10.1186/s12888-016-0736-6 – volume: 169 start-page: 141 issue: 2 year: 2012 ident: 2532_CR36 publication-title: Am J Psychiatry doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2011.11020335 – ident: 2532_CR6 doi: 10.1136/bmj.l835 – ident: 2532_CR10 – volume: 167 start-page: 70 issue: 1 year: 2013 ident: 2532_CR45 publication-title: JAMA Pediatr doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2013.420 – volume: 210 start-page: 190 issue: 3 year: 2017 ident: 2532_CR37 publication-title: Br J Psychiatry doi: 10.1192/bjp.bp.116.187773 – volume: 17 start-page: 817 issue: 11 year: 2002 ident: 2532_CR14 publication-title: J Gen Intern Med doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.2002.10319.x – volume: 72 start-page: 1102 issue: 11 year: 2015 ident: 2532_CR38 publication-title: JAMA Psychiatry doi: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2015.1516 – volume: 196 start-page: 13 issue: 1 year: 2010 ident: 2532_CR25 publication-title: Br J Psychiatry doi: 10.1192/bjp.bp.109.067116 – volume: 17 start-page: 215 issue: 1 year: 2017 ident: 2532_CR3 publication-title: BMC Psychiatry doi: 10.1186/s12888-017-1370-7 – ident: 2532_CR28 – volume: 2 start-page: 7 issue: 1 year: 2014 ident: 2532_CR46 publication-title: BMC Psychol doi: 10.1186/2050-7283-2-7 – volume: 16 start-page: 111 year: 2016 ident: 2532_CR34 publication-title: BMC Psychiatry doi: 10.1186/s12888-016-0819-4 – ident: 2532_CR20 – volume: 166 start-page: 1092 issue: 10 year: 2006 ident: 2532_CR19 publication-title: Arch Intern Med doi: 10.1001/archinte.166.10.1092 – volume: 13 start-page: 3 issue: 1 year: 2013 ident: 2532_CR21 publication-title: Couns Psychother Res doi: 10.1080/14733145.2012.729069 – volume: 15 start-page: 189 issue: 01 year: 1985 ident: 2532_CR26 publication-title: Psychol Med doi: 10.1017/S003329170002105X – volume-title: The quality of patient engagement and involvement in primary care year: 2010 ident: 2532_CR49 – volume: 6 start-page: 88 year: 2006 ident: 2532_CR7 publication-title: BMC Health Serv Res doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-6-88 – volume: 47 start-page: 87 issue: 1 year: 2012 ident: 2532_CR44 publication-title: Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol doi: 10.1007/s00127-010-0317-9 – volume: 74 start-page: e14 issue: 7 year: 2013 ident: 2532_CR9 publication-title: J Clin Psychiatry doi: 10.4088/JCP.12075tx2c – volume: 55 start-page: 259 issue: 4 year: 2013 ident: 2532_CR35 publication-title: Tijdschr Psychiatr – volume: 207 start-page: 93 issue: 2 year: 2015 ident: 2532_CR52 publication-title: Br J Psychiatry doi: 10.1192/bjp.bp.114.160978 – ident: 2532_CR30 – volume: 17 start-page: 135 issue: 2 year: 1973 ident: 2532_CR24 publication-title: J Psychosom Res doi: 10.1016/0022-3999(73)90014-7 – volume: 48 start-page: 9 issue: 1 year: 2011 ident: 2532_CR50 publication-title: Psychotherapy doi: 10.1037/a0022186 – volume: 368 start-page: 6 issue: 1 year: 2013 ident: 2532_CR13 publication-title: N Engl J Med doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1209500 – volume: 346 start-page: f540 issue: feb26 2 year: 2013 ident: 2532_CR31 publication-title: BMJ doi: 10.1136/bmj.f540 – ident: 2532_CR29 – volume: 17 start-page: 140 issue: 1 year: 2017 ident: 2532_CR47 publication-title: BMC Psychiatry doi: 10.1186/s12888-017-1305-3 – ident: 2532_CR40 – volume: 289 start-page: 3095 issue: 23 year: 2003 ident: 2532_CR2 publication-title: JAMA doi: 10.1001/jama.289.23.3095 – volume: 10 start-page: 361 issue: 6 year: 2003 ident: 2532_CR11 publication-title: Clin Psychol Psychother doi: 10.1002/cpp.383 – volume: 127 start-page: 122 issue: 1–3 year: 2010 ident: 2532_CR18 publication-title: J Affect Disord doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2010.04.030 – volume: 119 start-page: 66 issue: 1–3 year: 2009 ident: 2532_CR27 publication-title: J Affect Disord doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2009.03.021 – volume: 310 start-page: 1818 issue: 17 year: 2013 ident: 2532_CR48 publication-title: JAMA doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.280038 – volume: 366 start-page: 780 issue: 9 year: 2012 ident: 2532_CR12 publication-title: N Engl J Med doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1109283 – ident: 2532_CR5 – ident: 2532_CR16 doi: 10.1017/S1463423610000228 – volume: 207 start-page: 115 issue: 2 year: 2015 ident: 2532_CR4 publication-title: Br J Psychiatry doi: 10.1192/bjp.bp.114.145565 – ident: 2532_CR22 – ident: 2532_CR1 – volume: 30 start-page: 281 issue: 3 year: 2017 ident: 2532_CR42 publication-title: J Am Board Fam Med doi: 10.3122/jabfm.2017.03.160313 – volume: 16 start-page: 606 issue: 9 year: 2001 ident: 2532_CR17 publication-title: J Gen Intern Med doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.2001.016009606.x – volume: 8 start-page: 325 issue: 4 year: 2016 ident: 2532_CR15 publication-title: J Prim Health Care doi: 10.1071/HC16008 – volume: 189 start-page: 484 year: 2006 ident: 2532_CR8 publication-title: Br J Psychiatry doi: 10.1192/bjp.bp.106.023655 |
SSID | ssj0017851 |
Score | 2.2744663 |
Snippet | Clinical guidelines for depression in adults recommend the use of outcome measures and stepped care models in routine care. Such measures are based on symptom... Background Clinical guidelines for depression in adults recommend the use of outcome measures and stepped care models in routine care. Such measures are based... Abstract Background Clinical guidelines for depression in adults recommend the use of outcome measures and stepped care models in routine care. Such measures... |
SourceID | doaj pubmedcentral proquest gale pubmed crossref |
SourceType | Open Website Open Access Repository Aggregation Database Index Database Enrichment Source |
StartPage | 125 |
SubjectTerms | Adults Analysis Anxiety Anxiety disorders Case studies Clinical outcomes Clinical practice guidelines Comorbidity Depression Depression (Mood disorder) Drop-out Health psychology Integrative complexity (Psychology) Medical prognosis Medical protocols Mental depression Mood Outcomes Patient outcomes Primary care Psychiatry Psychological symptoms Recovery Recovery (Medical) |
SummonAdditionalLinks | – databaseName: DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals dbid: DOA link: http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwrV3Ni9UwEA-yB_EifltdJYLgQcO2Tdok3lZxWYT15MLeQj5xZbd9bPtE_3tn0r7yiqAXj22S0sxM8pshk98Q8roCSLWla5iKyjEhOGfOi4Yl8HWx4JUMFV5OPvvSnp6LzxfNxV6pL8wJm-iBJ8EdaW5Vio0G2NQihuRchXc5vU-tVtblaB0wbxdMzecHWHJ-d0VGtUcD7MJgERgqAcbzmpUrGMps_X_uyXugtE6Y3EOgk3vk7uw60uPpl--TW7F7QG6fzYfjD8mPmePzin7fhiml5R31gFI0543Hn-BwU9sFOvy63oz9NR2QwnKgdqCbG_wKFt6hfaL9doQRkV52dEmU7d7DUBpzxl4-mIfHic7kETk_-fT14ymbyyow37R8ZDEInoJ3EChp3YRQNtZZkZyvrdYiyTbK6MGPqjz3gF3KVgmr_ik8AIXwquSPyUHXd_EpoYB7SauIvFkQxsUSNAIKkkHLGuvl6oJUOykbP3OOY-mLK5NjD9WaSTMGNGOyZkxZkLfLmM3EuPHX3h9QeUtPZMvOL8CGzGxD5l82VJA3qHqDaxp-z9v5agJMEtmxzHFbKWT9EaIgh6uesBb9unlnPGbeCwZTc6lrJEGC5ldLM47E_LYu9tvcRykQYy0L8mSytWVKHL1YqUGYcmWFqzmvW7rLb5kpXJY44_bZ_xDSc3KnzguIs6o9JAfjzTa-AIdsdC_z2vsNemgyoQ priority: 102 providerName: Directory of Open Access Journals – databaseName: Health & Medical Collection dbid: 7X7 link: http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwfV3Ni9UwEA-6gngRv62uEkHwoGXbJm0SL7KKyyKsJxfeLeSrustu-3ztE_3vnUnz6hZhj22SksnMZGaayW8IeV2CSTWFrXMZpM05Zyy3jtd5C74uFrwSvsTLySdfm-NT_mVVr9IPtyGlVe72xLhR-97hP_KDiglVIZQM_7D-mWPVKDxdTSU0bpJbCF2GKV1iNQdcsfD87qKMbA4G2ItBLjBgAkvPqrxYGKOI2f__znzFNC3TJq_YoaN75G5yIOnhxPH75EboHpDbJ-mI_CH5lZA-L-j51k-JLe-oA1tFY_Z4-A1uNzWdp8Ofy_XYX9IBgSwHaga63uBXsPwO7Vvab0cYEehZR-d02e49DKUh5u3F43l4nEBNHpHTo8_fPh3nqbhC7uqGjXnwnLXeWQiXlKq9L2pjDW-tq4xSvBVNEMGBN1U65sCCSVO2WPtP4jEoBFkFe0z2ur4LTwkF69cqGRA9C4K5UChpWmuFV6LCqrkqI-VulbVLyONYAONCxwhENnrijAbO6MgZXWTk7TxmPeFuXNv7IzJv7omY2fFFv_mukwpqxYxsQ63AAVM8eJhiibeCnWuBLGPhI2-Q9Ro1G6bnTLqgAEQiRpY-bEqJ2D-cZ2R_0RM00i2bd8Kj044w6H_ym5FXczOOxCy3LvTb2EdKWMZKZOTJJGszSQx9WaFgMcVCChc0L1u6sx8RL1wUSHHz7PppPSd3qqgaLC-bfbI3brbhBThco30ZteovTKkpeg priority: 102 providerName: ProQuest |
Title | Clinical judgement, case complexity and symptom scores as predictors of outcome in depression: an exploratory analysis |
URI | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32183799 https://www.proquest.com/docview/2379204784 https://www.proquest.com/docview/2378897827 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PMC7076946 https://doaj.org/article/93a8fe5997694edfbb13944ccf698ab0 |
Volume | 20 |
hasFullText | 1 |
inHoldings | 1 |
isFullTextHit | |
isPrint | |
link | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwnV3da9RAEF9qC6Uv4rfReqwg-KDRfGyyu4JIT1qKcEWKB4cvy2azqZVrcl5y0v73zmw-2mDxwZeDu91JMjszmZnb2d8Q8ioEl6qDLPGFFZnPWBz7mWGJX0Csiw2veB7i4eTZSXo8Z18WyWKL9O2OugWsb03tsJ_UfL18d_nr6hMY_Edn8CJ9X8M7FuSNiRB48DjyIYXfwTuhoc7Y9a4CNqLvD87cSrdHdmOMGbiDgr32Uw7O_--X9g2vNa6ovOGiju6Ru11sSQ9aZbhPtmz5gOzOut3zh-R3BwK6pD83eVvz8pYacGPUFZbbS4jIqS5zWl9drJrqgtaIcVlTXdPVGq-CnXloVdBq0wCFpeclHSppyw9ASq0r6XM79_C1xTt5ROZHh98-H_td3wXfJGnc-DZncZGbDDIpKZM8DxKdaVZkJtJSsoKnllsDgVZoYgPOTeiwwLaAAndIIf8K4sdku6xK-5RQcIyFFBaBtSDPs4EUusgynkseYUNd6ZGwX2VlOlBy7I2xVC45EalqhaRASMoJSQUeeTPQrFpIjn_OnqLwhpkIp-1-qNZnqrNOJWMtCptIiM0kszk8YogHho0pgC2dwUVeo-gVqiE8ntHd2QVgEuGz1EEaCoQFYswj-6OZYKxmPNwrj-p1XUWgbxGiJMHwy2EYKbEArrTVxs0RApYx4h550urawFKvsh7hIy0c8TweKc9_OChxHiDH6bP_pnxO9iJnQLEfpvtku1lv7AsI05psQu7wBZ-QnenhydfTifuzY-LsET5Pp9__ALiTPn0 |
linkProvider | Scholars Portal |
linkToHtml | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwtV1Lb9QwELbKVgIuiDeBAkYCcYCoSewkNhJCLbTa0u4KoVbqzTiO0xa1ybLZBfqn-I3MOA8aIfXW464f8njG84jH3xDyMgSTqoMs9oUVmc85Y35meOwX4Otiwas0D_Fx8mSajA_458P4cIX86d7CYFplpxOdos4rg9_I1yOWygihZPiH2Q8fq0bh7WpXQqMRi117_gtCtvr9zifg76so2t7a_zj226oCvokTtvBtzlmRmwziBCnjPA9inWleZCbSUvIiTWxqDbgRoWEGVLfQYYFF7wTe_0F0ETCY9xpZ5QxCmRFZ3dyafvna31tgqfvuaY5I1mvQ_iCJGKKBb8EiPxiYP1cl4H9bcMEYDhM1L1i-7dvkVuuy0o1Gxu6QFVveJdcn7aX8PfKzxRY9pd-XeZNK85YasI7U5avb3-DoU13mtD4_my2qM1ojdGZNdU1nc5wFC_7QqqDVcgEjLD0paZ-gW76DodS6TEGXEAA_GxiV--TgSjb-ARmVVWkfEQr2tpDCIl4XhI82kEIXWZbmMo2wTq_0SNjtsjIt1jmW3DhVLuYRiWo4o4AzynFGBR5504-ZNUgfl_beROb1PRGl2_1RzY9Ue-iVZFoUNpbg8kluc1hiiO-QjSmALJ3BJK-R9Qp1CSzP6PZJBBCJqFxqIwkFog1x7pG1QU_QAWbY3AmPanVQrf6dGI-86JtxJObVlbZauj5CwDZGqUceNrLWk8TQe04lbGY6kMIBzcOW8uTYIZSnAVKcPL58Wc_JjfH-ZE_t7Ux3n5CbkTsmzA-TNTJazJf2Kbh7i-xZe8Yo-XbVx_ovCapnRw |
openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Clinical+judgement%2C+case+complexity+and+symptom+scores+as+predictors+of+outcome+in+depression%3A+an+exploratory+analysis&rft.jtitle=BMC+psychiatry&rft.au=Smith%2C+M.&rft.au=Francq%2C+B.&rft.au=McConnachie%2C+A.&rft.au=Wetherall%2C+K.&rft.date=2020-03-16&rft.pub=BioMed+Central&rft.eissn=1471-244X&rft.volume=20&rft_id=info:doi/10.1186%2Fs12888-020-02532-0&rft_id=info%3Apmid%2F32183799&rft.externalDocID=PMC7076946 |
thumbnail_l | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=1471-244X&client=summon |
thumbnail_m | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=1471-244X&client=summon |
thumbnail_s | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=1471-244X&client=summon |