Dataset Information

Systematic review to examine the methods used to adapt evidence-based psychological treatments for adults diagnosed with a mental illness.

ABSTRACT:

Question

The context for the implementation of evidence-based psychological treatments (EBPTs) often differs from the context in which the treatment was developed, which necessitates adaptations. In this systematic review we build on, and add to, prior approaches by examining the method used to guide such adaptations. In particular, we sought to elucidate the extent to which an empirical process is used.

Study selection and analysis

We focused on publications describing adaptations made to EBPTs for adults diagnosed with a mental illness. We searched PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase and Web of Science from database inception to July 2018. Two raters independently coded the articles for the method used to conduct the adaptation, the reason for and nature of the adaptation, and who made the adaptation.

Findings

The search produced 20 194 citations, which yielded 152 articles after screening. The most commonly used methods for planned adaptations were literature review (57.7%), clinical intuition (47.0%) and theory (38.9%). The use of data from stakeholder interviews ranked fourth (21.5%) and the use of other types of data (eg, pilot study, experiment, survey, interview) ranked last at fifth (12.1%). Few publications reporting ad hoc adaptations were identified (n=3).

Conclusions

This review highlights a need to (a) educate providers and researchers to carefully consider the methods used for the treatment adaptation process, and to use empirical methods where possible and where appropriate, (b) improve the quality of reporting of stakeholder interviews and (c) develop reporting standards that articulate optimal methods for conducting treatment adaptations.

SUBMITTER: Harvey AG

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8254592 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Systematic review to examine the methods used to adapt evidence-based psychological treatments for adults diagnosed with a mental illness.

Harvey Allison G AG Lammers Hannah S HS Dolsen Michael R MR Mullin Alice C AC Hilmoe Heather E HE Tran Melanie M Portnova Vera V Tuck Alison B AB Mallidi Ajitha A Fang Anya A Byrnes Caitlin C Kao Esther E Lee Colin C

Evidence-based mental health 20201221 1

<h4>Question</h4>The context for the implementation of evidence-based psychological treatments (EBPTs) often differs from the context in which the treatment was developed, which necessitates adaptations. In this systematic review we build on, and add to, prior approaches by examining the method used to guide such adaptations. In particular, we sought to elucidate the extent to which an empirical process is used.<h4>Study selection and analysis</h4>We focused on publications describing adaptation ...[more]

PMID: 33355291

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVE: Estimate the prevalence of psychotropic drugs use in the city of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, and establish its relationship with the presence of mental disorders. METHODS: A probabilistic sample of non-institutionalized individuals, from the general population of Rio de Janeiro (n = 1208;turn out:81%), 15 years or older, who were interviewed using the Composite International Diagnostic Interview 2.1 (depression, anxiety-phobia, OCD\PTSD, alcoholism sections), and asked about their psychotropic use during a 12 and one-month period before the interview. Data were collected between June/2007-February/2008.The prevalence was estimated with a confidence interval of 95%. The associations between psychotropics use and mental disorders were analyzed through a logistic regression model (Odds Ration - OR). RESULTS: The one-month prevalence of psychotropic drug use was 6.55%, 3.19% for men and 9.13% for women. Antidepressants were the most frequently used drug (2.78%), followed by anorectics (1.65%), tranquilizers (1.61%) and mood stabilizers (1.23%). General practitioners issued the highest number of prescriptions (46.3%), followed by psychiatrists (29.3%); 86.6% of the psychotropic drugs used were paid for by the patient himself. Individuals with increased likelihood of using psychotropic drugs were those that had received a psychiatric diagnosis during a one-month period before the study (OR:3.93), females (OR:1.82), separated/divorced (OR:2.23), of increased age (OR:1.03), with higher income (OR:2.96), and family history of mental disorder (OR:2.59); only 16% of the individuals with a current DSM IV diagnosis were using a psychotropic drug; 17% among individuals with a depression-related diagnosis and 8% with Phobic Anxiety Disorders-related diagnosis used psychotropics. CONCLUSION: Approximately 84% of individuals displaying some mental disorder did not use psychotropic drugs, which indicates an important gap between demand and access to treatment. A significant failure is evident in the health system for patients with mental disorders; this could be due to health workers' inability to recognize mental disorders among individuals.

Project description:BackgroundEvidence on technology-based psychological interventions (TBIs) for the treatment of depression is rapidly growing and covers a broad scope of research. Despite extensive research in this field, guideline recommendations are still limited to the general effectiveness of TBIs.ObjectiveThis study aims to structure evidence on TBIs by considering different application areas (eg, TBIs for acute treatment and their implementation in health care, such as stand-alone interventions) and treatment characteristics (eg, therapeutic rationale of TBIs) to provide a comprehensive evidence base and to identify research gaps in TBIs for diagnosed depression. Moreover, the reporting of negative events in the included studies is investigated in this review to enable subsequent safety assessment of the TBIs.MethodsRandomized controlled trials on adults diagnosed with unipolar depression receiving any kind of psychotherapeutic treatment, which was at least partly delivered by a technical medium, were eligible for inclusion in our preregistered systematic review. We searched for trials in CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials; until August 2020), MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PSYNDEX, CINAHL; until the end of January 2018), clinical trial registers, and sources of gray literature (until the end of January 2019). Study selection and data extraction were conducted by 2 review authors independently.ResultsDatabase searches resulted in 15,546 records, of which 241 publications were included, representing 83 completed studies and 60 studies awaiting classification (ie, preregistered studies, study protocols). Almost all completed studies (78/83, 94%) addressed the acute treatment phase, being largely either implemented as stand-alone interventions (66/83, 80%) or blended treatment approaches (12/83, 14%). Studies on TBIs for aftercare (4/83, 5%) and for bridging waiting periods (1/83, 1%) were scarce. Most TBI study arms (n=107) were guided (59/107, 55.1%), delivered via the internet (80/107, 74.8%), and based on cognitive behavioral treatment approaches (88/107, 79.4%). Almost all studies (77/83, 93%) reported information on negative events, considering dropouts from treatment as a negative event. However, reports on negative events were heterogeneous and largely unsystematic.ConclusionsResearch has given little attention to studies evaluating TBIs for aftercare and for bridging waiting periods in people with depression, even though TBIs are seen as highly promising in these application areas; thus, high quality studies are urgently needed. In addition, the variety of therapeutic rationales on TBIs has barely been represented by identified studies hindering the consideration of patient preferences when planning treatment. Finally, future studies should use specific guidelines to systematically assess and report negative events.Trial registrationInternational Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) CRD42016050413; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42016050413.International registered report identifier (irrid)RR2-10.1136/bmjopen-2018-028042.

Project description:BackgroundMost mental disorders begin in adolescence; however, there are gaps in our understanding of youth mental health. Clinical and policy gaps arise from our current inability to predict, from amongst all youth who experience mild behavioural disturbances, who will go on to develop a mental illness, what that illness will be, and what can be done to change its course and prevent its worsening to a serious mental illness (SMI). There are also gaps in our understanding of how known risk factors set off neurobiological changes that may play a role in determining who will develop a SMI. Project goals are (i) to identify youth at different stages of risk of SMI so that intervention can begin as soon as possible and (ii) to understand the triggers of these mental illnesses.MethodThis 2-site longitudinal study will recruit 240 youth, ages 12-25, who are at different stages of risk for developing a SMI. The sample includes (a) healthy individuals, (b) symptom-free individuals who have a first-degree relative with a SMI, (c) youth who are experiencing distress and may have mild symptoms of anxiety or depression, and (d) youth who are already demonstrating attenuated symptoms of SMI such as bipolar disorder or psychosis. We will assess, every 6 months for one year, a wide range of clinical and psychosocial factors to determine which factors can be used to predict key outcomes. We will also assess neuroimaging and peripheral markers. We will develop and validate a prediction algorithm that includes demographic, clinical and psychosocial predictors. We will also determine if adding biological markers to our algorithm improves prediction.DiscussionOutcomes from this study include an improved clinical staging model for SMI and prediction algorithms that can be used by health care providers as decision-support tools in their practices. Secondly, we may have a greater understanding of clinical, social and cognitive factors associated with the clinical stages of development of a SMI, as well as new insights from neuroimaging and later neurochemical biomarker studies regarding predisposition to SMI development and progression through the clinical stages of illness.

Dataset Information

Systematic review to examine the methods used to adapt evidence-based psychological treatments for adults diagnosed with a mental illness.

Question

Study selection and analysis

Findings

Conclusions

Publications

Systematic review to examine the methods used to adapt evidence-based psychological treatments for adults diagnosed with a mental illness.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets