Research ExplorerPublicationsPatient involvement in developing a patient-targeted feedbac...

Patient involvement in developing a patient-targeted feedback intervention after depression screening in primary care within the randomized controlled trial GET.FEEDBACK.GP

Standard

Patient involvement in developing a patient-targeted feedback intervention after depression screening in primary care within the randomized controlled trial GET.FEEDBACK.GP. / Seeralan, Tharanya; Härter, Martin; Koschnitzke, Cornelia; Scholl, Michael; Kohlmann, Sebastian; Lehmann, Marco; Eisele, Marion; Braunschneider, Lea-Elena; Marx, Gabriella; Scherer, Martin; Löwe, Bernd; Magaard, Julia Luise; Brütt, Anna Levke.

In: HEALTH EXPECT, Vol. 24 Suppl 1, No. Suppl 1, 05.2021, p. 95-112.

Research output: SCORING: Contribution to journal › SCORING: Journal article › Research › peer-review

Harvard

Seeralan, T, Härter, M, Koschnitzke, C, Scholl, M, Kohlmann, S, Lehmann, M, Eisele, M, Braunschneider, L-E, Marx, G, Scherer, M, Löwe, B, Magaard, JL & Brütt, AL 2021, 'Patient involvement in developing a patient-targeted feedback intervention after depression screening in primary care within the randomized controlled trial GET.FEEDBACK.GP', HEALTH EXPECT, vol. 24 Suppl 1, no. Suppl 1, pp. 95-112. https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.13039

APA

Seeralan, T., Härter, M., Koschnitzke, C., Scholl, M., Kohlmann, S., Lehmann, M., Eisele, M., Braunschneider, L-E., Marx, G., Scherer, M., Löwe, B., Magaard, J. L., & Brütt, A. L. (2021). Patient involvement in developing a patient-targeted feedback intervention after depression screening in primary care within the randomized controlled trial GET.FEEDBACK.GP. HEALTH EXPECT, 24 Suppl 1(Suppl 1), 95-112. https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.13039

Vancouver

Seeralan T, Härter M, Koschnitzke C, Scholl M, Kohlmann S, Lehmann M et al. Patient involvement in developing a patient-targeted feedback intervention after depression screening in primary care within the randomized controlled trial GET.FEEDBACK.GP. HEALTH EXPECT. 2021 May;24 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):95-112. https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.13039

Bibtex

@article{92558bf5d0b1440fbbf292d5e12ecf62,
title = "Patient involvement in developing a patient-targeted feedback intervention after depression screening in primary care within the randomized controlled trial GET.FEEDBACK.GP",
abstract = "BACKGROUND: Patient and public involvement (PPI) is increasingly required in mental health services research. To empower patients to actively address depression, the GET.FEEDBACK.GP study evaluates a patient-targeted feedback intervention after depression screening using the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9).OBJECTIVE: To refine the patient-targeted feedback from a previous study within a participatory research team (PRT) by conducting workshops to investigate patients' needs and preferences for feedback. To evaluate the process and outcome of PPI.DESIGN: Patient and public involvement was carried out on the levels of collaboration and consultation. A PRT of patient partners and researchers planned and conducted three workshops with patients. Patients' needs were investigated using a focus group. Participants prioritized needs, discussed feedback drafts and evaluated two drafts using cognitive debriefings. Researchers of the PRT communicated the results at project level. PPI was evaluated using the Public and Patient Engagement Evaluation Tools (PPEET).SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A purposeful sampling of N = 12 patients with experiences of depression participated in at least one workshop.RESULTS: Relevant content-related needs about feedback (eg no distinction between severe and moderate symptoms), recommendations for action and patient-relevant information were considered. Needs for comprehensible, valuing, nonstigmatizing language and design elements (eg dimensional bar) were implemented. Workshops and PRT were positively evaluated.DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Patient and public involvement influenced the content, wording and design of the feedback. Strengths include two levels of PPI, methodical diversity and purposeful sampling. Limitations include the lack of inclusion of patients who are unaware of their depression. The evaluated PPI concept can be useful for future studies.",
author = "Tharanya Seeralan and Martin H{\"a}rter and Cornelia Koschnitzke and Michael Scholl and Sebastian Kohlmann and Marco Lehmann and Marion Eisele and Lea-Elena Braunschneider and Gabriella Marx and Martin Scherer and Bernd L{\"o}we and Magaard, {Julia Luise} and Br{\"u}tt, {Anna Levke}",
note = "{\textcopyright} 2020 The Authors Health Expectations published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.",
year = "2021",
month = may,
doi = "10.1111/hex.13039",
language = "English",
volume = "24 Suppl 1",
pages = "95--112",
journal = "HEALTH EXPECT",
issn = "1369-6513",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "Suppl 1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Patient involvement in developing a patient-targeted feedback intervention after depression screening in primary care within the randomized controlled trial GET.FEEDBACK.GP

AU - Seeralan, Tharanya

AU - Härter, Martin

AU - Koschnitzke, Cornelia

AU - Scholl, Michael

AU - Kohlmann, Sebastian

AU - Lehmann, Marco

AU - Eisele, Marion

AU - Braunschneider, Lea-Elena

AU - Marx, Gabriella

AU - Scherer, Martin

AU - Löwe, Bernd

AU - Magaard, Julia Luise

AU - Brütt, Anna Levke

N1 - © 2020 The Authors Health Expectations published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

PY - 2021/5

Y1 - 2021/5

N2 - BACKGROUND: Patient and public involvement (PPI) is increasingly required in mental health services research. To empower patients to actively address depression, the GET.FEEDBACK.GP study evaluates a patient-targeted feedback intervention after depression screening using the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9).OBJECTIVE: To refine the patient-targeted feedback from a previous study within a participatory research team (PRT) by conducting workshops to investigate patients' needs and preferences for feedback. To evaluate the process and outcome of PPI.DESIGN: Patient and public involvement was carried out on the levels of collaboration and consultation. A PRT of patient partners and researchers planned and conducted three workshops with patients. Patients' needs were investigated using a focus group. Participants prioritized needs, discussed feedback drafts and evaluated two drafts using cognitive debriefings. Researchers of the PRT communicated the results at project level. PPI was evaluated using the Public and Patient Engagement Evaluation Tools (PPEET).SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A purposeful sampling of N = 12 patients with experiences of depression participated in at least one workshop.RESULTS: Relevant content-related needs about feedback (eg no distinction between severe and moderate symptoms), recommendations for action and patient-relevant information were considered. Needs for comprehensible, valuing, nonstigmatizing language and design elements (eg dimensional bar) were implemented. Workshops and PRT were positively evaluated.DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Patient and public involvement influenced the content, wording and design of the feedback. Strengths include two levels of PPI, methodical diversity and purposeful sampling. Limitations include the lack of inclusion of patients who are unaware of their depression. The evaluated PPI concept can be useful for future studies.

AB - BACKGROUND: Patient and public involvement (PPI) is increasingly required in mental health services research. To empower patients to actively address depression, the GET.FEEDBACK.GP study evaluates a patient-targeted feedback intervention after depression screening using the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9).OBJECTIVE: To refine the patient-targeted feedback from a previous study within a participatory research team (PRT) by conducting workshops to investigate patients' needs and preferences for feedback. To evaluate the process and outcome of PPI.DESIGN: Patient and public involvement was carried out on the levels of collaboration and consultation. A PRT of patient partners and researchers planned and conducted three workshops with patients. Patients' needs were investigated using a focus group. Participants prioritized needs, discussed feedback drafts and evaluated two drafts using cognitive debriefings. Researchers of the PRT communicated the results at project level. PPI was evaluated using the Public and Patient Engagement Evaluation Tools (PPEET).SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A purposeful sampling of N = 12 patients with experiences of depression participated in at least one workshop.RESULTS: Relevant content-related needs about feedback (eg no distinction between severe and moderate symptoms), recommendations for action and patient-relevant information were considered. Needs for comprehensible, valuing, nonstigmatizing language and design elements (eg dimensional bar) were implemented. Workshops and PRT were positively evaluated.DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Patient and public involvement influenced the content, wording and design of the feedback. Strengths include two levels of PPI, methodical diversity and purposeful sampling. Limitations include the lack of inclusion of patients who are unaware of their depression. The evaluated PPI concept can be useful for future studies.

U2 - 10.1111/hex.13039

DO - 10.1111/hex.13039

M3 - SCORING: Journal article

C2 - 32286005

VL - 24 Suppl 1

SP - 95

EP - 112

JO - HEALTH EXPECT

JF - HEALTH EXPECT

SN - 1369-6513

IS - Suppl 1

ER -