Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37331280›Full record

Trial reportPatient education and counseling2023

Veterans' views of PARTNER-MH, a peer-led patient navigation intervention, to improve patient engagement in care and patient-clinician communication: A qualitative study.

Johanne Eliacin, Marianne S Matthias, Kenzie A Cameron, Diana J Burgess

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Patient education and counseling, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04515771 (Improving Patient-provider Communication to Reduce Mental Health Disparities), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT04515771 nacompletednot on this map

Improving Patient-provider Communication to Reduce Mental Health Disparities (CDA 16-153)

TypeinterventionalSponsorVA Office of Research and DevelopmentRan2020 to 2022Enrolled50ConditionsHealthcare Disparities, Mental HealthArmsPARTNER-MH
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Johanne EliacinNational Center for PTSD, VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston, USA; HSR&D Center for Health Information and Communication, Richard L. Roudebush VA Medical Center, Indianapolis, USA; Regenstrief Institute, Indianapolis, USA; Indiana University School of Medicine, Department of General Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, Indianapolis, USA. Electronic address: Johanne.eliacin@va.gov.
Marianne S MatthiasHSR&D Center for Health Information and Communication, Richard L. Roudebush VA Medical Center, Indianapolis, USA; Regenstrief Institute, Indianapolis, USA; Indiana University School of Medicine, Department of General Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, Indianapolis, USA.
Kenzie A CameronNorthwestern University, Feinberg School of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine, Chicago, USA.
Diana J BurgessMinneapolis VA Healthcare System, Center for Care Delivery and Outcomes Research, Minneapolis, USA; University of Minnesota, Department of Medicine, Minneapolis, USA.
Indiana University School of MedicineNorthwestern University · USUniversity of Minnesota · USVA Boston Healthcare System · US

Funding

Research Design, Data, and Analytics CoreP30DK092949 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO · PI MILDA Renne SAUNDERS · 2011 to 2026
$10.0M
NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK092949
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveIn this study, we report on participants' experiences of PARTNER-MH, a peer-led, patient-navigation intervention for racially and ethnically minoritized patients in Veterans Health Administration mental health services aimed at improving patient engagement in care and patient-clinician communication. Participants described their views of PARTNER-MH, barriers and facilitators to the intervention's implementation, and their application of varied intervention concepts to improve engagement in care and communication with their mental health clinicians.

methodsThis is a qualitative analysis of the PARTNER-MH pilot randomized controlled trial. Participants participated in semi-structured interviews guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Rapid data analysis approach was used to analyze the data.

resultsParticipants (n = 13) perceived PARTNER-MH as an acceptable intervention, and viewed use of peers as interventionists, long-term outreach and engagement efforts, and navigation services favorably. Barriers to implementation included limited flexibility in peers' schedules and lack of peer/participant gender concordance, as well as limited options for program delivery modality. Three main themes summarized participants' views and perceived benefits of PARTNER-MH that contributed to improved patient-clinician communication: 1) increased patient engagement, 2) improved patient-clinician relationship, and 3) enhanced communication self-efficacy.

conclusionsParticipants viewed PARTNER-MH as beneficial and identified several intervention components that contributed to improved engagement in care, communication self-efficacy, and patient-clinician communication. PRACTICE IMPLICATION: Some patients, especially minoritized patients and those who have been disenfranchised from healthcare systems may benefit from peer-led interventions that facilitate engagement in care and communication self-efficacy to improve patient-clinician communication and healthcare outcomes.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04515771.

Indexed as

Mental Health ServicesPatient NavigationVeteransCommunicationHumansPatient ParticipationQualitative ResearchCommunication self-efficacyHealthcare disparitiesMental healthPatient-clinician communicationPatient navigationPeer-led interventionVeterans

Identifiers

PMID37331280
PMCPMC11184508
OpenAlexW4380853470

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.