Cited by 9Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum DisordersAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesMental Health Treatment and Access

Obsessive compulsive disorder: integration of cognitive-behaviour therapy and clinical psychology care into the primary care context

Kyrios, Michael, Moulding, Richard, Jones, Barbara·2010·Australian Journal of Primary Health

Abstract

In primary care, evidence-based psychological treatments for obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD), such as cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT), have not been readily available. We aimed to develop models of care for OCD that account for barriers to access and can be integrated into general practice settings. Multiple methodologies and sources were utilised, including literature reviews, a reference group, focus groups, interviews and questionnaire responses from consumers, psychologists and/or GPs. It was found that there were similarities and some differences among stakeholders in attitudes and knowledge about OCD, and views about treatment and assessment in primary care. Three models of care for patients with OCD were developed and integrated into a treatment program operating through a division of general practice. Participating GPs preferred referral to a specialist clinic, irrespective of participation in an educational program about OCD. Based on these findings, it is suggested that effective integration of specialist CBT treatments for OCD into primary care is possible if the needs and views of all stakeholders are accounted for.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1071/py08074

Cites

18 of 18 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?

  • Access to evidence-based treatment for OCD is poor due to a shortage of appropriately qualified professionals, long waitlists, and individuals' financial constraints.

    “For those that do present for help, access to evidence-based treatment is poor; a shortage of appropriately qualified professionals (especially in geographically remote areas), long waitlists, and individuals’ financial constraints mean that specialised evidence-based treatment is often unavailable [8].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kyrios, M., Moulding, R., & Jones, B.
Affiliations
Swinburne University of Technology (AU)
Corresponding author
Kyrios, Michael
Venue
Australian Journal of Primary Health
Published
2010-05-19
Volume
16
Issue
2
Pages
167-173
ISSN
  • 1448-7527 (ISSN-L)
  • 1836-7399
OpenAlex
W2127371016
Cited by
9
References
18
Citations by year
2023: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 1
FWCI
1.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Australian Journal of Primary Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Bank (Australian Catholic University) (submittedVersion)
  • ANU Open Research (Australian National University) (submittedVersion)
  • Swinburne figshare (Swinburne University of Technology) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
Keywords
obsessive-compulsive disorder, cognitive behavioral therapy, primary care integration, models of care, access barriers, general practitioners, clinical psychologists, specialist referral, stakeholder perspectives
MeSH terms
Humans, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, Primary Health Care, Psychology, Clinical, Surveys and Questionnaires, Victoria, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Focus Groups

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