CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 121Health Policy Implementation ScienceMental Health Treatment and AccessPsychiatric care and mental health services

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 46 of the 46 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Project IMPACT: A Report on Barriers and Facilitators to Sustainability

Blasinsky, Margaret, Goldman, Howard H., Unützer, Jürgen·2006·Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research
DOI 10.1007/s10488-006-0086-7
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Project IMPACT is a collaborative care intervention to assist older adults suffering from major depressive disorder or dysthymia. Qualitative research methods were used to determine the barriers and facilitators to sustaining IMPACT in a primary care setting. Strong evidence supports the program's sustainability, but considerable variation exists in continuation strategies and operationalization across sites. Sustainability depended on the organizations' support of collaborative care models, the availability of staff trained in the intervention, and funding. The intervention's success was the most important sustainability factor, as documented by outcome data and through the "real world" experience of treating patients with this intervention.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10488-006-0086-7

Cites

46 of 46 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 46 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Harpole, L., Steffens, D., Saur, C., & Unützer, J. (1999). Making an IMPACT: Improving care for late life depression [video]. Durham, NC: Duke University Media Group.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–120 of 120

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Blasinsky, M., Goldman, H. H., & Unützer, J.
Affiliations
  • University of Maryland, Baltimore (US)
  • University of Washington Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Blasinsky, Margaret
ORCID
Venue
Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2006-09-13
Volume
33
Issue
6
Pages
718-729
ISSN
  • 0894-587X (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-3289
DOI
10.1007/s10488-006-0086-7
OpenAlex
W1963816311
Cited by
121
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 6
FWCI
10.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
  • Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychiatric care and mental health services
Keywords
project impact, collaborative care, geriatric depression, dysthymia, program sustainability, barriers and facilitators, primary care, organizational support, employee training, funding
MeSH terms
Aged, Continuity of Patient Care, Major Depressive Disorder, Depressive Disorder, Major, Humans, Interviews as Topic, Mental Health Services, Pamphlets, Patient Education as Topic, Primary Health Care, Problem Solving, United States, Videotape Recording, Multicenter Studies as Topic, Program Evaluation, Models, Organizational, Case Management, Dysthymic Disorder, Qualitative Research

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review