Cited by 15Digital Mental Health InterventionsMental Health Treatment and AccessPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications

Guided self-help supported by paraprofessional mental health workers: An uncontrolled before--after cohort study

Open access
Farrand, Paul, Confue, Phil, Byng, Richard, Shaw, Steve·2009·Health & Social Care in the Community

Abstract

There has been considerable development of guided self-help clinics within primary care. This uncontrolled before-after cohort study examines efficiency and effectiveness of these clinics when supported by paraprofessional mental health workers having little mental health training and experience. Data were collected by seven Graduate Mental Health Workers (GMHW) located in South-west England. Alongside an analysis of clinic attendance and dropout, efficiency was measured with respect to the number and length of sessions to support patients with the effectiveness of the interventions examined with respect to problem severity. Over a 15-month period, 1162 patients were referred to the GMHW clinics with 658 adopting guided self-help. Patients using guided self-help received an average input per patient, excluding assessment, of four sessions of 40 minutes. Dropout rate was comparable to other primary-care-based mental health clinics supported by experienced mental health professionals with 458 patients completing all support sessions. However, only 233 patients went on to attend the 3 months of follow-up session. Effectiveness of guided self-help clinics supported by paraprofessional mental health workers was comparable to that supported by an experienced mental health nurse. Improvements in problem severity were statistically significant, with 55% and 58% (final support session) and 63% and 62% (3 months of follow-up) of patients experiencing clinically significant and reliable change for anxiety and depression, respectively. However, concerns exist over the efficiency of the GMHW clinic especially with respect to the use of longer support sessions and high dropout rate at the 3 months of follow-up session. The paper concludes by highlighting the effectiveness of guided self-help when supported by paraprofessional mental health workers, but questions the utility of the two-plus-one model of service delivery proposing a collaborative care approach as an alternative.

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 · 10.1111/j.1365-2524.2008.00792.x

Cites

42 of 42 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?

  • In a study by Farrand et al., use of paraprofessional mental health workers within primary care guided self-help clinics led to a significant reduction in anxious and depressive symptoms among patients at 3-month follow-up.

    “In a study by Farrand et al., use of paraprofessional mental health workers within primary care guided self-help clinics led to a significant reduction in anxious and depressive symptoms among patients at 3-month follow-up.”

    From A Mixed Method Investigation of Parent-Adolescent Communication About Mental Health (2024) · cites this paper as [38]

    The Statistical analysis section (page not available) reports significantly lower anxiety and depression scores at 3-month follow-up than at assessment (both P < 0.001). But this was an uncontrolled before–after study, and only 233 patients attended follow-up. The observed reductions support the outcome claim, not the stronger assertion that use of paraprofessional workers caused them. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

4 of the 46 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Bower P. & Gilbody S. (2005) Stepped care in psychological therapies: access, effectiveness and efficiency. British Journal of Psychiatry 186, 11-17.
  2. Frude N. (2005) Prescription for a good read. Healthcare Coun- selling and Psychotherapy Journal 5, 9-13.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Farrand, P., Confue, P., Byng, R., & Shaw, S.
Affiliations
  • University of Plymouth (GB)
  • Peninsula College of Medicine and Dentistry (GB)
Venue
Health & Social Care in the Community
Published
2009-01
Volume
17
Issue
1
Pages
9-17
ISSN
  • 0966-0410 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2524
OpenAlex
W1971353627
Cited by
15
References
46
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
2.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Health & Social Care in the Community (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Keywords
guided self-help, dropout rates, treatment efficiency, anxiety, depression, problem severity, collaborative care, psychiatric nursing
MeSH terms
Workforce, Adult, Allied Health Personnel, Anxiety, Community Mental Health Services, Depression, England, Female, Health Services Research, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Patient Dropouts, Primary Health Care, Referral and Consultation, Self Care, Social Support, Cohort Studies, Models, Organizational, Efficiency, Organizational, Directive Counseling

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