↓ Skip to main content

Implementing measurement-based care (iMBC) for depression in community mental health: a dynamic cluster randomized trial study protocol

Overview of attention for article published in Implementation Science, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
8 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
41 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
93 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
Implementing measurement-based care (iMBC) for depression in community mental health: a dynamic cluster randomized trial study protocol
Published in
Implementation Science, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13012-015-0313-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cara C. Lewis, Kelli Scott, C. Nathan Marti, Brigid R. Marriott, Kurt Kroenke, John W. Putz, Peter Mendel, David Rutkowski

Abstract

Measurement-based care is an evidence-based practice for depression that efficiently identifies treatment non-responders and those who might otherwise deteriorate [1]. However, measurement-based care is underutilized in community mental health with data suggesting fewer than 20 % of behavioral health providers using this practice to inform treatment. It remains unclear whether standardized or tailored approaches to implementation are needed to optimize measurement-based care fidelity and penetration. Moreover, there is some suggestion that prospectively tailored interventions that are designed to fit the dynamic context may optimize public health impact, though no randomized trials have yet tested this notion [2]. This study will address the following three aims: (1) To compare the effect of standardized versus tailored MBC implementation on clinician-level and client-level outcomes; (2) To identify contextual mediators of MBC fidelity; and (3) To explore the impact of MBC fidelity on client outcomes. This study is a dynamic cluster randomized trial of standardized versus tailored measurement-based care implementation in Centerstone, the largest provider of community-based mental health services in the USA. This prospective, mixed methods implementation-effectiveness hybrid design allows for evaluation of the two conditions on both clinician-level (e.g., MBC fidelity) and client-level (depression symptom change) outcomes. Central to this investigation is the focus on identifying contextual factors (e.g., attitudes, resources, process, etc.) that mediate MBC fidelity and optimize client outcomes. This study will contribute generalizable and practical strategies for implementing systematic symptom monitoring to inform and enhance behavioral healthcare. Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02266134 .

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 93 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Unknown 91 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 21 23%
Student > Master 17 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 11%
Student > Bachelor 6 6%
Other 19 20%
Unknown 9 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 27 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 20 22%
Social Sciences 10 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 11 12%
Unknown 19 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 18 November 2021.
All research outputs
#5,657,459
of 21,201,318 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#1,039
of 1,677 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,938
of 255,068 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#6
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,201,318 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,677 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.7. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 255,068 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.