Cited by 18Diabetes Management and EducationAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesDigital Mental Health Interventions

IAPT and Long Term Medical Conditions: What Can We Offer?

Wroe, Abigail L., Rennie, Edward W., Gibbons, Sarah, Hassy, Arek, Chapman, Judith E.·2015·Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy

Abstract

Background The proposal of a 4-year plan to integrate treatment of people with long term medical conditions (LTCs) into the IAPT service (Department of Health, 2011) seeks for research to understand the effectiveness of IAPT interventions for this patient group. Aim The aim of this service development pilot work was to develop an intervention that is effective for people with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM). It was hypothesized that the standard IAPT intervention would not be effective, but that it can be adapted so that it is effective both in terms of mood and self-management of T2DM. Method Clients (n = 95) who experienced mild to moderate depression and/or anxiety and had a diagnosis of T2DM opted to attend. The intervention was adapted over a series of cohorts from a standard Step 2 intervention. A team of Psychological Wellbeing Practitioners (PWPs), a Clinical Health Psychologist and a General Practitioner worked in collaboration, using outcomes measures and feedback from service users and facilitators. Results The standard IAPT Step 2 intervention met with challenges when specifically targeting this client group. Using paired t-tests, the modified Step 2 intervention demonstrated significant improvements from pre- to postintervention measures both in terms of psychological (n = 17) and physical (n = 9) outcomes. Conclusion It is concluded that it may be possible to modify a generic Step 2 IAPT intervention to demonstrate improvements both in terms of psychological wel…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s1352465813001227

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wroe, A. L., Rennie, E. W., Gibbons, S., Hassy, A., & Chapman, J. E.
Affiliations
  • Royal Holloway University of London (GB)
  • Berkshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
Corresponding author
Wroe, Abigail L.
Venue
Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy
Published
2014-03-11
Volume
43
Issue
4
Pages
412-425
ISSN
  • 1352-4658 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-1833
OpenAlex
W2131367409
Cited by
18
References
8
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2
FWCI
2.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
Keywords
Improving Access to Psychological Therapies, type 2 diabetes, depression, anxiety, cognitive behavioral therapy, diabetes self-management, psychological well-being, service adaptation, general practitioner collaboration
MeSH terms
Adult, Anxiety, Depression, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Female, Humans, Long-Term Care, Male, Patient Care Planning, Surveys and Questionnaires, Self Care

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