Cited by 12Health Policy Implementation ScienceMental Health Treatment and AccessPsychiatric care and mental health services

Improving Depression Care for Adults With Serious Mental Illness in Underresourced Areas: Community Coalitions Versus Technical Support

Open access
Castillo, Enrico G., Shaner, Roderick, Tang, Lingqi, Chung, Bowen, Jones, Felica, Whittington, Yolanda, Miranda, Jeanne, Wells, Kenneth B.·2018·Psychiatric Services

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Community Partners in Care (CPIC) was a group-randomized study of two approaches to implementing expanded collaborative depression care: Community Engagement and Planning (CEP), a coalition approach, and Resources for Services (RS), a technical assistance approach. Collaborative care networks in both arms involved health care and other agencies in five service sectors. This study examined six- and 12-month outcomes for CPIC participants with serious mental illness. METHODS: This secondary analysis focused on low-income CPIC participants from racial-ethnic minority groups with serious mental illness in underresourced Los Angeles communities (N=504). Serious mental illness was defined as self-reported severe depression (≥20 on the Patient Health Questionnaire-8) at baseline or a lifetime history of bipolar disorder or psychosis. Logistic and Poisson regression with multiple imputation and response weights, controlling for covariates, was used to model intervention effects. RESULTS: Among CPIC participants, 50% had serious mental illness. Among those with serious mental illness, CEP relative to RS reduced the likelihood of poor mental health-related quality of life (OR=.62, 95% CI=.41-.95) but not depression (primary outcomes); reduced the likelihood of having homelessness risk factors and behavioral health hospitalizations; increased the likelihood of mental wellness; reduced specialty mental health medication and counseling visits; and increased faith-based depression visits (each p<.05) at six months. There were no statistically significant 12-month effects. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that a coalition approach to implementing expanded collaborative depression care, compared with technical assistance to individual programs, may reduce short-term behavioral health hospitalizations and improve mental health-related quality of life and some social outcomes for adults with serious mental illness, although no evidence was found for long-term effects in this subsample.

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 · 10.1176/appi.ps.201600514

Cites

34 of 34 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?

  • A community-based mental health program in the US comprising multidisciplinary care met the needs of adults with SMI, with significant improvements in health and wellbeing and reduced reliance on acute-based care.

    “The findings revealed that the program met the needs of the sample because significant improvements were identified in participants' health and wellbeing outcomes, and their reliance on acute-based care was mitigated (Castillo et al. 2018).”

    From Effect of community mental health care programs in Australia: A systematic review (2020) · cites this paper as Castillo et al. 2018

    The Results (Intervention Effects; page unavailable) report significantly better mental health-related quality of life and mental wellness, and fewer behavioral health hospitalizations, for the coalition approach versus technical support at six months. The paper does not establish that the program broadly ‘met the needs’ of participants: the Discussion calls the findings exploratory, and the Results report no significant differences at 12 months. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    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

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [29]Groves RM Dillman DA Eltinge JL Survey nonresponse New York, NY Wiley-Interscience 2002

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Castillo, E. G., Shaner, R., Tang, L., Chung, B., Jones, F., Whittington, Y., Miranda, J., & Wells, K. B.
Affiliations
University of California, Los Angeles (US)
Venue
Psychiatric Services
Published
2018-02-01
Volume
69
Issue
2
Pages
195-203
ISSN
  • 0022-1597 (ISSN-L)
  • 1075-2730
  • 1557-9700
OpenAlex
W2765150589
Cited by
12
References
34
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1
FWCI
3.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychiatric Services (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (R01MD007721)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychiatric care and mental health services
Keywords
severe mental illness, depression care, collaborative care, community coalitions, technical assistance, mental health-related quality of life, low-income adults, racial and ethnic minorities, bipolar disorder, psychosis
MeSH terms
Adult, Bipolar Disorder, Community Mental Health Services, Depressive Disorder, Female, Ill-Housed Persons, Hospitalization, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Poverty, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Psychotic Disorders, Quality of Life, Los Angeles, Logistic Models, Medically Uninsured, Self Report

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