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...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inBMC psychiatry Vol. 20; no. 1; pp. 125 - 11
Main Authors Smith, M., Francq, B., McConnachie, A., Wetherall, K., Pelosi, A., Morrison, J.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published England BioMed Central Ltd 16.03.2020
BioMed Central
BMC
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN1471-244X
1471-244X
DOI10.1186/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