Search

England’s national Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) programme advocates stepped care as its organizational delivery of psychological therapies to common mental health problems. There is limited evidence regarding the efficacy of stepped care as a service delivery model, heterogeneity of definition and differences in model implementation in both research and routine practice, hence outcome comparison in terms of effectiveness of model is difficult. Despite sound evidence of the efficacy of low intensity interventions there appears to be a perpetuation of the notion that severity and complexity should only be treated by a high intensity intervention through the continuation of a stratified care model. Yet no psychotherapy treatment is found to be more superior to another, and not enough is known about what works for whom to aid the matching of treatment decision. In the absence of understanding precise treatment factors optimal for recovery, it may be useful to better understand the impact of a service delivery model, and whether different models achieve different outcomes. This study aims to contribute to the discussion regarding the stepped care definition and delivery, and explores the impact on clinical outcomes where different types of stepped care have been implemented within the same service. An observational cohort study analysed retrospective data (n = 16,723) over a 4 year period, in a single IAPT service, where delivery changed from one type of stepped care model to another. We compared the outcomes of treatment completers with a stratified care model and a progression care model. We also explored the assumption that patients who score severe on psychological measures, and therefore are potentially complex, would achieve better outcomes in a stratified model. Outcomes in each model type were compared, alongside baseline factor variables. A significant association was observed between a recovery outcome and model type, with patients 1.5 times more likely to recover in the progression delivery model. The potential implications are that with a progression stepped care model of service delivery, more patients can be treated with a lower intensity intervention, even with initial severe presentations, ensuring that only those that need high intensity CBT or equivalent are stepped up. This could provide services with an effective clinical model that is efficient and potentially more cost effective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many disciplines of scholarship are interested in the Relative Age Effect (RAE), whereby age-banding confers advantages on older members of the cohort over younger ones. Most research does not test this relationship in a manner consistent with theory (which requires a decline in frequency across the cohort year), instead resorting to non-parametric, non-directional approaches. In this article, the authors address this disconnect, provide an overview of the benefits associated with Poisson regression modelling, and two managerially useful measures for quantifying RAE bias, namely the Indices of Discrimination and Wastage. In a tutorial-like exposition, applications and extensions of this approach are illustrated using data on professional soccer players competing in the top two tiers of the “Big Five” European football leagues in the search to identify paragon clubs, leagues, and countries from which others may learn to mitigate this form of age-discrimination in the talent identification process. As with OLS regression, Poisson regression may include more than one independent variable. In this way we test competing explanations of RAE; control for unwanted sources of covariation; model interaction effects (that different clubs and countries may not all be subject to RAE to the same degree); and test for non-monotonic versions of RAE suggested in the literature. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]