DepressionPST-NANCT03514394
DDBT Adapted Problem Solving Treatment for Primary Care
A study testing Modified Behavioral Activation (Task Sharing) in people with Depression and PTSD, run by University of Washington at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
Evidence-based psychosocial interventions are rarely used in part because of their design complexity. Although many implementation frameworks do address the importance of EBPI characteristics, adapting and modifying EBPIs to enhance usability has not been a focus. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Depression, PTSD
- What is being tested?
- Modified Behavioral Activation (Task Sharing)
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 44 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 1 Jul 2019to 30 Dec 2021
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Primary care patient in rural MT and WY; Speaks English; Patient Health Questionnaire - 9 > 10.
Who cannot join
- none
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
Big Horn Valley Health Center
Hardin, Montana, 59034
About this study
Evidence-based psychosocial interventions are rarely used in part because of their design complexity. Although many implementation frameworks do address the importance of EBPI characteristics, adapting and modifying EBPIs to enhance usability has not been a focus. User-centered design (UCD) approaches, which have been successful in creating hardware and software tools that are accessible and compelling to use, have the potential to modify EBPIs so that they are accessible and compelling to clinicians. We hypothesize that UCD driven modifications to EBPI usability (target mechanism) will result in enhanced clinician ability to deliver EBPI elements competently, and that better competence results in better patient reported outcomes. We will modify Behavioral Activation (BA), an EBPI often used in primary care, to function as a Task Sharing model between clinicians and care managers. Our specific aims are to (1) identify usability problems clinicians and care managers encounter with BA (2) create a clinician- and care manager-driven modification of BA and (3) compare the modified Task Sharing version of BA to usual care on usability, clinician competence, and patient reported outcomes.
Read the detailed description
High quality delivery of evidence-based psychosocial interventions (EBPIs) in primary care medicine is a function of many variables, including clinician training and ready access to EBPI decision support. Importantly, quality is also driven by the clinician's ability to implement the therapeutic elements of EBPIs to fidelity and with competence. Even when clinicians undergo rigorous training, and find the intervention components useful in care, clinicians significantly drift from the original protocol because the processes, structure and elements of care frequently clash with clinician productivity and the shifting needs of the patient populations they serve. Clinicians in low resource settings like federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) report that while elements of EBPIs are important, their design is cumbersome, complex, overwhelming, inflexible, and minimize the nonspecific factors clinicians feel are crucial for quality delivery of care. In short, EBPIs demonstrate low usability (i.e., the extent to which a product can be used by specified users to achieve specified goals with effectiveness, efficiency, and satisfaction in a specified context of use. Although many implementation science (IS) frameworks do address the importance of EBPI characteristics, adapting and modifying EBPIs to enhance usability has not been a focus. User centered design (UCD) approaches, which have been successful in creating hardware and software tools that are accessible and compelling to use, have the potential to modify EBPIs so that they are accessible and compelling to clinicians. We hypothesize that UCD-driven modifications to EBPI usability will result in enhanced clinician ability to deliver EBPI elements competently (target), and that better competence results in better patient-reported outcomes. We will modify Behavioral Activation (BA) because it is the EBPI often used in primary care settings. To prepare for a larger trial to test hypotheses regarding the impact of EBPI usability on uptake, fidelity and competence, the aims of Project 002 R34 are:
Aim 1: Discover Phase (3 months). Using iterative and participatory methods, we will interview up to 15 clinicians from FHQCs affiliated with the WWAMI region Practice Research Network (WPRN, a collaborative group of primary care practices through the states of Washington, Wyoming, Alaska, Montana and Idaho to facilitate innovative community-based research), and observe them in routine practice to identify usability challenges. Contribution to the Center: Data from this phase will be used to inform the Typology of EBPI Targets.
Aim 2: Design/Build Phase (6 months) After identification of potential targets, the research team will work via Zoom teleconferencing with the original clinicians from the discover phase and 0-5 new clinicians to engage in a rapid cycle of iterative prototype development and testing (e.g., storyboarding, paper prototypes) of BA modifications. The build of these modifications will include the development of intervention prototypes for user testing and refinement with input from these care managers. Contribution to the Center: Data from this phase will be used to inform the Matrix of EBPI Modifications.
Aim 3: Test Phase (15 months). We will test and compare the BA modification (Task Sharing) to usual care in a small non-randomized trial. We will assign all provider teams (therapist \& care manager(s)) in the clinic to use Task Sharing with their patients. We will then compare patient outcomes for those receiving Task Sharing vs. patients receiving usual clinic care. H1: Modifications developed in the Design/Build phase for targets identified in the Discover Phase will result in better usability (System Usability and User Burden Scales) compared to usual care. H2: Task Sharing will be more effective than usual care on improving clinical outcomes of functional disability (Sheehan Disability Scale [SDS]), change in depression symptoms over time (PHQ-9 total score), and change in anxiety symptoms over time (GAD-7 total score).
- Conditions
- Depression, PTSD
- Being tested
- Usual Care, Modified Behavioral Activation (Task Sharing)
- Medical subject headings
- Depression, Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Usual CareBehavioural
The clinic's usual care includes counseling, substance use disorder treatment, peer support services, and some elements of traditional BA (not the modified BA).
Modified Behavioral Activation (Task Sharing)Behavioural
This intervention will include all core elements of Behavioral Activation (BA), which is a behavioral intervention that identifies work, social, health, or family activities that patients have stopped engaging in because of their mood. The intervention will also include a Task Sharing modification, which will allow clinicians and care managers to more efficiently share the tasks involved in BA.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Usual Care | Active comparator | Usual care administered for depression at clinic. Receives: Behavioral: Usual Care |
| Modified Behavioral Activation (Task Sharing) | Experimental | This intervention will be a modification of Behavioral Activation (BA), which is a behavioral intervention that identifies work, social, health, or family activities that patients have stopped engaging in because of their mood. Specifically, we will introduce a Task Sharing modification, which will allow clinicians and care managers to more efficiently share the tasks involved in BA. These modifications will be based on clinician and care manager feedback from Phases 1 and 2 of this study. Receives: Behavioral: Modified Behavioral Activation (Task Sharing) |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9)
9 item patient self report measure of mood, where each item as rated on a 0 (no problem) to 3 (every day) scale. Total scores range from 0 - 27. Higher scores indicate increased depression, a score of 10 or greater is considered to be clinical depression. Data points were collected from each individual multiple times across the course of the study. For comparisons we conducted a multiple case study design examining each person's individual trajectory. The means and standard deviations reported are for all available observations stratified by condition.
Measured: Patient participants will complete the PHQ-9 at baseline and weekly for 10 weeks, single value calculated averaging across all available observations.
Generalized Anxiety Disorder (7-item) Scale (GAD-7)
A 7-item screener for generalized anxiety. It consists of items related to GAD. Participants rate on a scale of 0-3 how much they have experienced in the last two weeks. Total scores range from 0 - 21. The scale is a valid screener for GAD. High scores indicate higher anxiety symptom severity. Data points were collected from each individual multiple times across the course of the study. For comparisons we conducted a multiple case study design examining each person's individual trajectory. The means and standard deviations reported are for all available observations stratified by condition.
Measured: Patient participants will complete the GAD-7 at baseline and weekly for 10 weeks, single value calculated averaging across all available observations.
Secondary outcomes (7)
Acceptability Intervention Measure (AIM)
This is a four item measure of intervention acceptability, where each item is rated on a 1-5 scale, with 1 = not at all acceptable and 5 = very acceptable. Total scores are calculated taking the mean of the four items, reporting a range of 1 - 5.
Measured: Clinician participants will complete the AIM at baseline and 3-month follow-up.
User Burden Scale
The User Burden Scale is a 26-item scale that assesses six domains of user burden: use, physical burden, time/social burdens, mental/emotional burden, privacy concerns and financial burdens. The scale is calculated item measure of perceived burden of use that covers 6 domains: difficulty of use, emotional burden, physical burden, time and social burden, financial burden and privacy. Each item is rated on a 04- scale, with a maximum score of 104 (high burden) and minimum score of 0 (low burden). We will compare the ratings of intervention burden between groups to determine if the new intervention is considered less burdensome than the traditional model.
Measured: Clinician participants will complete the UBS at baseline and 3-month follow-up.
Time to Certification
We will record the number of hours needed for clinicians in each group to be trained in their assigned intervention.
Measured: Hours toward certification will be collected over a three month period.
Skill Drift Using the PST Adherence Checklist
This is a 20 item scale, where each item rates clinician competencies in the delivery of PST, using a 0 (not competent) to 5 (expert level) scale. Higher scores indicate greater competence. IN this use case, we will be measuring the time to which clinicians receive their first score below 3 (average) on the PST Adherence Checklist
Measured: We will rate nine therapy sessions per clinician over a six month period.
System Usability Scale
This is a 10-item scale with each item ranked on a five point system of low to high usability. The scale score is calculated by adding the item scores and multiplying by 2.5. This is your total score and can range from 0 - 100. A score of 68 or better is considered to be above average usability. A score less than 68 is considered to be poor usability. In this study, a score of 80 or more is considered our cut off for high usability.
Measured: Clinician participants will complete the SUS at baseline and 3-month follow-up
Intervention Appropriateness Measure (IAM)
This is a four item measure of intervention appropriateness, where each item is rated on a 1-5, with 1 = not at all acceptable and 5 = very acceptable. High scores (min: 1, max:5) indicate higher levels of appropriateness. Total scores are calculated taking the mean of the four items, reporting a range of 1 - 5.
Measured: Clinician participants will complete the IAM at baseline and 3-month follow-up
Feasibility of Intervention Measure (FIM)
This is a four-item measure of intervention feasibility, where each item is rated on a 1-5 scale, with 1 = not at all acceptable and 5 = very acceptable. Higher scores indicate higher levels of feasibility. Total scores are calculated taking the mean of the four items, reporting a range of 1 - 5.
Measured: Clinician participants will complete the FIM at baseline and 3-month follow-up
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted2 May 2018
- Study start1 Jul 2019
- Primary completion25 Jun 2021
- Study completion30 Dec 2021
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for DepressionStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by University of WashingtonThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- Phase 1 will consist of observation and qualitative interviews; Phase two will consist of iterative design methods; phase three is a pilot randomized clinical trial
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 44 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Washington
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH)
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Pat Arean, University of Washington
- Investigators
- Patricia Arean, PhD, Principal investigator, UWMC Psychiatry
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03514394
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- STUDY00004236
- Other IDs
- 1P50MH115837-01
- Acronym
- PST-NA
- Status last verified
- Jul 2022
- First submitted
- 27 Mar 2018
- Last updated
- 27 Jul 2023
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: Data will be made available through the UW ALACRITY Center once it is collected and analyzed.
Publications
Lyon AR, Munson SA, Renn BN, Atkins DC, Pullmann MD, Friedman E, Arean PA. Use of Human-Centered Design to Improve Implementation of Evidence-Based Psychotherapies in Low-Resource Communities: Protocol for Studies Applying a Framework to Assess Usability . JMIR Res Protoc. 2019 Oct 9;8(10):e14990. doi: 10.2196/14990.
PubMed 31599736
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 27 Jul 2023. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- DDBT Adapted Problem Solving Treatment for Primary Care
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03514394
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- PST-NA / STUDY00004236
- Conditions
- Depression, PTSD
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 44 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of WashingtonUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH)
- Study start
- 1 Jul 2019 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 25 Jun 2021 (actual)
- Study completion
- 30 Dec 2021 (actual)
- First posted
- 2 May 2018 (actual)
- Results
- Posted 23 Aug 2022
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Evidence-based psychosocial interventions are rarely used in part because of their design complexity. Although many implementation frameworks do address the importance of EBPI characteristics, adapting and modifying EBPIs to enhance usability has not been a focus. User-centered design (UCD) approaches, which have been successful in creating hardware and software tools that are accessible and compelling to use, have the potential to modify EBPIs so that they are accessible and compelling to clinicians. We hypothesize that UCD driven modifications to EBPI usability (target mechanism) will result in enhanced clinician ability to deliver EBPI elements competently, and that better competence results in better patient reported outcomes. We will modify Behavioral Activation (BA), an EBPI often used in primary care, to function as a Task Sharing model between clinicians and care managers. Our specific aims are to (1) identify usability problems clinicians and care managers encounter with BA (2) create a clinician- and care manager-driven modification of BA and (3) compare the modified Task Sharing version of BA to usual care on usability, clinician competence, and patient reported outcomes.
Detailed description
High quality delivery of evidence-based psychosocial interventions (EBPIs) in primary care medicine is a function of many variables, including clinician training and ready access to EBPI decision support. Importantly, quality is also driven by the clinician's ability to implement the therapeutic elements of EBPIs to fidelity and with competence. Even when clinicians undergo rigorous training, and find the intervention components useful in care, clinicians significantly drift from the original protocol because the processes, structure and elements of care frequently clash with clinician productivity and the shifting needs of the patient populations they serve. Clinicians in low resource settings like federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) report that while elements of EBPIs are important, their design is cumbersome, complex, overwhelming, inflexible, and minimize the nonspecific factors clinicians feel are crucial for quality delivery of care. In short, EBPIs demonstrate low usability (i.e., the extent to which a product can be used by specified users to achieve specified goals with effectiveness, efficiency, and satisfaction in a specified context of use. Although many implementation science (IS) frameworks do address the importance of EBPI characteristics, adapting and modifying EBPIs to enhance usability has not been a focus. User centered design (UCD) approaches, which have been successful in creating hardware and software tools that are accessible and compelling to use, have the potential to modify EBPIs so that they are accessible and compelling to clinicians. We hypothesize that UCD-driven modifications to EBPI usability will result in enhanced clinician ability to deliver EBPI elements competently (target), and that better competence results in better patient-reported outcomes. We will modify Behavioral Activation (BA) because it is the EBPI often used in primary care settings. To prepare for a larger trial to test hypotheses regarding the impact of EBPI usability on uptake, fidelity and competence, the aims of Project 002 R34 are:
Aim 1: Discover Phase (3 months). Using iterative and participatory methods, we will interview up to 15 clinicians from FHQCs affiliated with the WWAMI region Practice Research Network (WPRN, a collaborative group of primary care practices through the states of Washington, Wyoming, Alaska, Montana and Idaho to facilitate innovative community-based research), and observe them in routine practice to identify usability challenges. Contribution to the Center: Data from this phase will be used to inform the Typology of EBPI Targets.
Aim 2: Design/Build Phase (6 months) After identification of potential targets, the research team will work via Zoom teleconferencing with the original clinicians from the discover phase and 0-5 new clinicians to engage in a rapid cycle of iterative prototype development and testing (e.g., storyboarding, paper prototypes) of BA modifications. The build of these modifications will include the development of intervention prototypes for user testing and refinement with input from these care managers. Contribution to the Center: Data from this phase will be used to inform the Matrix of EBPI Modifications.
Aim 3: Test Phase (15 months). We will test and compare the BA modification (Task Sharing) to usual care in a small non-randomized trial. We will assign all provider teams (therapist \& care manager(s)) in the clinic to use Task Sharing with their patients. We will then compare patient outcomes for those receiving Task Sharing vs. patients receiving usual clinic care. H1: Modifications developed in the Design/Build phase for targets identified in the Discover Phase will result in better usability (System Usability and User Burden Scales) compared to usual care. H2: Task Sharing will be more effective than usual care on improving clinical outcomes of functional disability (Sheehan Disability Scale [SDS]), change in depression symptoms over time (PHQ-9 total score), and change in anxiety symptoms over time (GAD-7 total score).
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Phase 1 will consist of observation and qualitative interviews; Phase two will consist of iterative design methods; phase three is a pilot randomized clinical trial
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Usual Care | Active comparator | Behavioral: Usual CareUsual care administered for depression at clinic. |
| Modified Behavioral Activation (Task Sharing) | Experimental | Behavioral: Modified Behavioral Activation (Task Sharing)This intervention will be a modification of Behavioral Activation (BA), which is a behavioral intervention that identifies work, social, health, or family activities that patients have stopped engaging in because of their mood. Specifically, we will introduce a Task Sharing modification, which will allow clinicians and care managers to more efficiently share the tasks involved in BA. These modifications will be based on clinician and care manager feedback from Phases 1 and 2 of this study. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Primary care patient in rural MT and WY; Speaks English; Patient Health Questionnaire - 9 > 10.
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- none
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Usual CareThe clinic's usual care includes counseling, substance use disorder treatment, peer support services, and some elements of traditional BA (not the modified BA). | Behavioural | Usual Care |
| Modified Behavioral Activation (Task Sharing)This intervention will include all core elements of Behavioral Activation (BA), which is a behavioral intervention that identifies work, social, health, or family activities that patients have stopped engaging in because of their mood. The intervention will also include a Task Sharing modification, which will allow clinicians and care managers to more efficiently share the tasks involved in BA. | Behavioural | Modified Behavioral Activation (Task Sharing) |
Primary outcome
Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9)
Time frame: Patient participants will complete the PHQ-9 at baseline and weekly for 10 weeks, single value calculated averaging across all available observations.
9 item patient self report measure of mood, where each item as rated on a 0 (no problem) to 3 (every day) scale. Total scores range from 0 - 27. Higher scores indicate increased depression, a score of 10 or greater is considered to be clinical depression. Data points were collected from each individual multiple times across the course of the study. For comparisons we conducted a multiple case study design examining each person's individual trajectory. The means and standard deviations reported are for all available observations stratified by condition.
Generalized Anxiety Disorder (7-item) Scale (GAD-7)
Time frame: Patient participants will complete the GAD-7 at baseline and weekly for 10 weeks, single value calculated averaging across all available observations.
A 7-item screener for generalized anxiety. It consists of items related to GAD. Participants rate on a scale of 0-3 how much they have experienced in the last two weeks. Total scores range from 0 - 21. The scale is a valid screener for GAD. High scores indicate higher anxiety symptom severity. Data points were collected from each individual multiple times across the course of the study. For comparisons we conducted a multiple case study design examining each person's individual trajectory. The means and standard deviations reported are for all available observations stratified by condition.
7 secondary outcomes
Acceptability Intervention Measure (AIM)
Time frame: Clinician participants will complete the AIM at baseline and 3-month follow-up.
User Burden Scale
Time frame: Clinician participants will complete the UBS at baseline and 3-month follow-up.
Time to Certification
Time frame: Hours toward certification will be collected over a three month period.
Skill Drift Using the PST Adherence Checklist
Time frame: We will rate nine therapy sessions per clinician over a six month period.
System Usability Scale
Time frame: Clinician participants will complete the SUS at baseline and 3-month follow-up
Intervention Appropriateness Measure (IAM)
Time frame: Clinician participants will complete the IAM at baseline and 3-month follow-up
Feasibility of Intervention Measure (FIM)
Time frame: Clinician participants will complete the FIM at baseline and 3-month follow-up
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 27 Jul 2023.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 31599736Lyon AR, Munson SA, Renn BN, Atkins DC, Pullmann MD, Friedman E, Arean PA. Use of Human-Centered Design to Improve Implementation of Evidence-Based Psychotherapies in Low-Resource Communities: Protocol for Studies Applying a Framework to Assess Usability . JMIR Res Protoc. 2019 Oct 9;8(10):e14990. doi: 10.2196/14990.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. Data will be made available through the UW ALACRITY Center once it is collected and analyzed.
Related trials for Depression
Enrolling by invitationObservational study
Digital Phenotypes for Predicting Depression_Validation
Major Depressive Disorder, Bipolar I Disorder
Recruiting
Understanding the Neural Underpinnings of Risk-Taking Behavior in Psychiatric Disease
Depression - Major Depressive Disorder
RecruitingPhase 2
Cognitive Dysfunction and Inflammation in Depression: Experimental Inhibition Via Infliximab
Depressive Disorder, Major, Inflammation
RecruitingObservational study
Tracking Response to Antidepressants in Advance of Investigational Trials
Major Depressive Disorder
Recruiting
Focused Ultrasound for Behavioral Health
Depression, Anxiety
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Patricia Arean, PhD principal investigator
UWMC Psychiatry
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Modified Behavioral Activation (Task Sharing) in people with Depression and PTSD, run by University of Washington at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 27 Jul 2023. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 23 Aug 2022). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) (time frame: Patient participants will complete the PHQ-9 at baseline and weekly for 10 weeks, single value calculated averaging across all available observations.). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT03514394, which also lists 1 linked publication.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 27 Jul 2023.