Cited by 288Mental Health Treatment and AccessAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications

Stepped care treatment delivery for depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Open access
van Straten, A., Hill, J., Richards, D. A., Cuijpers, P.·2015·Psychological Medicine

Abstract

Background: In stepped care models patients typically start with a low-intensity evidence-based treatment. Progress is monitored systematically and those patients who do not respond adequately step up to a subsequent treatment of higher intensity. Despite the fact that many guidelines have endorsed this stepped care principle it is not clear if stepped care really delivers similar or better patient outcomes against lower costs compared with other systems. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of all randomized trials on stepped care for depression. Method: We carried out a comprehensive literature search. Selection of studies, evaluation of study quality and extraction of data were performed independently by two authors. Results: A total of 14 studies were included and 10 were used in the meta-analyses (4580 patients). All studies used screening to identify possible patients and care as usual as a comparator. Study quality was relatively high. Stepped care had a moderate effect on depression (pooled 6-month between-group effect size Cohen's d was 0.34; 95% confidence interval 0.20–0.48). The stepped care interventions varied greatly in number and duration of treatment steps, treatments offered, professionals involved, and criteria to step up. Conclusions: There is currently only limited evidence to suggest that stepped care should be the dominant model of treatment organization. Evidence on (cost-) effectiveness compared with high-intensity psychological therapy alone, as well as with matched care, is required.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0033291714000701

Cites

58 of 58 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Gilbody S (2006). Is collaborative care cost effective? Journal of Affective Disorders., 91, S4-S5.
  2. Lipsey MW (1990). Design sensitivity. Statistical power for experimental research.SAGE publications: Newbury Park, California.
  3. The Cochrane Collaboration (2011). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011), Wiley-Blackwell.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
van Straten, A., Hill, J., Richards, D. A., & Cuijpers, P.
Affiliations
  • University of Exeter (GB)
  • Amsterdam Public Health (NL)
Venue
Psychological Medicine
Published
2014-03-26
Volume
45
Issue
2
Pages
231-246
ISSN
  • 0033-2917 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8978
OpenAlex
W1979026663
Cited by
288
References
58
Citations by year
2026: 20 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 31 · 2022: 33 · 2021: 35 · 2020: 26 · 2019: 37 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 2
FWCI
2.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychological Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • VU Research Portal (publishedVersion)
  • Open Research Exeter (University of Exeter) (submittedVersion)
  • Multilingual Matters (Channel View Publications) (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute for Health and Care Research (NF-SI-0514-10037, NF-SI-0611-10203)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Keywords
stepped care, depression, depression treatment, treatment intensity, cost-effectiveness, care organization
MeSH terms
Complementary Therapies, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Depression, Humans, Psychotherapy, Self Care, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic

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