↓ Skip to main content

Counselling versus low-intensity cognitive behavioural therapy for persistent sub-threshold and mild depression (CLICD): a pilot/feasibility randomised controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Psychiatry, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
192 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Counselling versus low-intensity cognitive behavioural therapy for persistent sub-threshold and mild depression (CLICD): a pilot/feasibility randomised controlled trial
Published in
BMC Psychiatry, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12888-015-0582-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elizabeth Freire, Christopher Williams, Claudia-Martina Messow, Mick Cooper, Robert Elliott, Alex McConnachie, Andrew Walker, Deborah Heard, Jill Morrison

Abstract

Persistent depressive symptoms below the threshold criteria for major depression represent a chronic condition with high risk of progression to a diagnosis of major depression. The evidence base for psychological treatments such as Person-Centred Counselling and Low-Intensity Cognitive Behavioural Therapy for sub-threshold depressive symptoms and mild depression is limited, particularly for longer-term outcomes. This study aimed to test the feasibility of delivering a randomised controlled trial into the clinical and cost effectiveness of Low-Intensity Cognitive Behavioural Therapy versus Person-Centred Counselling for patients with persistent sub-threshold depressive symptoms and mild depression. The primary outcome measures for this pilot/feasibility trial were recruitment, adherence and retention rates at six months from baseline. An important secondary outcome measure was recovery from, or prevention of, depression at six months assessed via a structured clinical interview by an independent assessor blind to the participant's treatment condition. Thirty-six patients were recruited in five general practices and were randomised to either eight weekly sessions of person-centred counselling each lasting up to an hour, or up to eight weeks of cognitive-behavioural self-help resources with guided telephone support sessions lasting 20-30 minutes each. Recruitment rate in relation to the number of patients approached at the general practices was 1.8 %. Patients attended an average of 5.5 sessions in both interventions. Retention rate for the 6-month follow-up assessments was 72.2 %. Of participants assessed at six months, 71.4 % of participants with a diagnosis of mild depression at baseline had recovered, while 66.7 % with a diagnosis of persistent subthreshold depression at baseline had not developed major depression. There were no significant differences between treatment groups for both recovery and prevention of depression at six months or on any of the outcome measures. It is feasible to recruit participants and successfully deliver both interventions in a primary care setting to patients with subthreshold and mild depression; however recruiting requires significant input at the general practices. The evidence from this study suggests that short-term Person-Centred Counselling and Low-Intensity Cognitive Behaviour Therapy are potentially effective and their effectiveness should be evaluated in a larger randomised controlled study which includes a health economic evaluation. Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN60972025 .

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 192 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Unknown 189 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 31 16%
Student > Bachelor 29 15%
Researcher 23 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 6%
Other 35 18%
Unknown 40 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 74 39%
Medicine and Dentistry 32 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 7%
Social Sciences 10 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 2%
Other 10 5%
Unknown 48 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 March 2016.
All research outputs
#4,048,070
of 22,821,814 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychiatry
#1,552
of 4,690 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#51,445
of 263,344 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychiatry
#29
of 84 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,821,814 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,690 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 263,344 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 84 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.