scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Kerrie Clover

Bio: Kerrie Clover is an academic researcher from University of Newcastle. The author has contributed to research in topics: Anxiety & Distress. The author has an hindex of 25, co-authored 55 publications receiving 1896 citations. Previous affiliations of Kerrie Clover include Centre for Mental Health & Information Technology University.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
06 Oct 2005-BMJ
TL;DR: A postcard intervention reduced repetitions of deliberate self poisoning, although it did not significantly reduce the proportion of individual repeaters.
Abstract: Objective To determine whether an intervention using postcards (postcards from the EDge project) reduces repetitions of hospital treated deliberate self poisoning. Design Randomised controlled trial. Setting Regional referral service for general hospital treated deliberate self poisoning in Newcastle, Australia. Participants 772 patients aged over 16 years with deliberate self poisoning. Intervention Non-obligatory intervention using eight postcards over 12 months along with standard treatment compared with standard treatment alone. Main outcome measures Proportion of patients with one or more repeat episodes of deliberate self poisoning and the number of repeat episodes for deliberate self poisoning per person in 12 months. Results The proportion of repeaters with deliberate self poisoning in the intervention group did not differ significantly from that in the control group (57/378, 15.1%, 95% confidence interval 11.5% to 18.7% v 68/394, 17.3%, 13.5% to 21.0%: difference between groups -2%, -7% to 3%). In unadjusted analysis the number of repetitions were significantly reduced (incidence risk ratio 0.55, 0.35 to 0.87). Conclusion A postcard intervention reduced repetitions of deliberate self poisoning, although it did not significantly reduce the proportion of individual repeaters.

267 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Brooke Levis1, Brooke Levis2, Ying Sun1, Chen He1, Yin Wu1, Yin Wu2, Ankur Krishnan1, Parash Mani Bhandari2, Parash Mani Bhandari1, Dipika Neupane1, Dipika Neupane2, Mahrukh Imran1, Eliana Brehaut1, Zelalem Negeri2, Zelalem Negeri1, Felix Fischer3, Andrea Benedetti4, Andrea Benedetti2, Brett D. Thombs, Liying Che, Alexander W. Levis, Kira E. Riehm, Nazanin Saadat, Marleine Azar, Danielle B. Rice, Jill Boruff, Lorie A. Kloda, Pim Cuijpers, Simon Gilbody, John P. A. Ioannidis, Dean McMillan, Scott B. Patten, Ian Shrier, Roy C. Ziegelstein, Ainsley Moore, Dickens Akena, Dagmar Amtmann, Bruce Arroll, Liat Ayalon, Hamid Reza Baradaran, Anna Beraldi, Charles N. Bernstein, Arvin Bhana, Charles H. Bombardier, Ryna Imma Buji, Peter Butterworth, Gregory Carter, Marcos Hortes Nisihara Chagas, Juliana C.N. Chan, Lai Fong Chan, Dixon Chibanda, Rushina Cholera, Kerrie Clover, Aaron Conway, Yeates Conwell, Federico M. Daray, Janneke M. de Man-van Ginkel, Jaime Delgadillo, Crisanto Diez-Quevedo, Jesse R. Fann, Sally Field, Jane Fisher, Daniel Fung, Emily Garman, Bizu Gelaye, Leila Gholizadeh, Lorna Gibson, Felicity Goodyear-Smith, Eric P. Green, Catherine G. Greeno, Brian J. Hall, Petra Hampel, Liisa Hantsoo, Emily E. Haroz, Martin Härter, Ulrich Hegerl, Leanne Hides, Stevan E. Hobfoll, Simone Honikman, Marie Hudson, Thomas Hyphantis, Masatoshi Inagaki, Khalida Ismail, Hong Jin Jeon, Nathalie Jette, Mohammad E. Khamseh, Kim M. Kiely, Sebastian Köhler, Brandon A. Kohrt, Yunxin Kwan, Femke Lamers, Maria Asunción Lara, Holly Levin-Aspenson, Valéria Lino, Shen-Ing Liu, Manote Lotrakul, Sonia Regina Loureiro, Bernd Löwe, Nagendra P. Luitel, Crick Lund, Ruth Ann Marrie, Laura Marsh, Brian Marx, Anthony McGuire, Sherina Mohd Sidik, Tiago N. Munhoz, Kumiko Muramatsu, Juliet Nakku, Laura Navarrete, Flávia de Lima Osório, Vikram Patel, Brian W. Pence, Philippe Persoons, Inge Petersen, Angelo Picardi, Stephanie L. Pugh, Terence J. Quinn, Elmars Rancans, Sujit D Rathod, Katrin Reuter, Svenja Roch, Alasdair G Rooney, Heather Rowe, Iná S. Santos, Miranda Schram, Juwita Shaaban, Eileen H. Shinn, Abbey C. Sidebottom, Adam Simning, Lena Spangenberg, Lesley Stafford, Sharon C. Sung, Keiko Suzuki, Richard Swartz, Pei Lin Lynnette Tan, Martin Taylor-Rowan, Thach Duc Tran, Alyna Turner, Christina M. van der Feltz-Cornelis, Thandi van Heyningen, Henk van Weert, Lynne I. Wagner, JianLi Wang, Jennifer White, Kirsty Winkley, Karen Wynter, Mitsuhiko Yamada, Qing Zhi Zeng, Yuying Zhang 
09 Jun 2020-JAMA
TL;DR: The combination was estimated to reduce the number of participants needing to complete the full PHQ-9 by 57% (56%-58%) and to understand the clinical and research value of this combined approach to screening.
Abstract: Importance The Patient Health Questionnaire depression module (PHQ-9) is a 9-item self-administered instrument used for detecting depression and assessing severity of depression. The Patient Health Questionnaire-2 (PHQ-2) consists of the first 2 items of the PHQ-9 (which assess the frequency of depressed mood and anhedonia) and can be used as a first step to identify patients for evaluation with the full PHQ-9. Objective To estimate PHQ-2 accuracy alone and combined with the PHQ-9 for detecting major depression. Data sources MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, PsycINFO, and Web of Science (January 2000-May 2018). Study selection Eligible data sets compared PHQ-2 scores with major depression diagnoses from a validated diagnostic interview. Data extraction and synthesis Individual participant data were synthesized with bivariate random-effects meta-analysis to estimate pooled sensitivity and specificity of the PHQ-2 alone among studies using semistructured, fully structured, or Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI) diagnostic interviews separately and in combination with the PHQ-9 vs the PHQ-9 alone for studies that used semistructured interviews. The PHQ-2 score ranges from 0 to 6, and the PHQ-9 score ranges from 0 to 27. Results Individual participant data were obtained from 100 of 136 eligible studies (44 318 participants; 4572 with major depression [10%]; mean [SD] age, 49 [17] years; 59% female). Among studies that used semistructured interviews, PHQ-2 sensitivity and specificity (95% CI) were 0.91 (0.88-0.94) and 0.67 (0.64-0.71) for cutoff scores of 2 or greater and 0.72 (0.67-0.77) and 0.85 (0.83-0.87) for cutoff scores of 3 or greater. Sensitivity was significantly greater for semistructured vs fully structured interviews. Specificity was not significantly different across the types of interviews. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.88 (0.86-0.89) for semistructured interviews, 0.82 (0.81-0.84) for fully structured interviews, and 0.87 (0.85-0.88) for the MINI. There were no significant subgroup differences. For semistructured interviews, sensitivity for PHQ-2 scores of 2 or greater followed by PHQ-9 scores of 10 or greater (0.82 [0.76-0.86]) was not significantly different than PHQ-9 scores of 10 or greater alone (0.86 [0.80-0.90]); specificity for the combination was significantly but minimally higher (0.87 [0.84-0.89] vs 0.85 [0.82-0.87]). The area under the curve was 0.90 (0.89-0.91). The combination was estimated to reduce the number of participants needing to complete the full PHQ-9 by 57% (56%-58%). Conclusions and relevance In an individual participant data meta-analysis of studies that compared PHQ scores with major depression diagnoses, the combination of PHQ-2 (with cutoff ≥2) followed by PHQ-9 (with cutoff ≥10) had similar sensitivity but higher specificity compared with PHQ-9 cutoff scores of 10 or greater alone. Further research is needed to understand the clinical and research value of this combined approach to screening.

189 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A postcard intervention halved self-poisoning events and reduced psychiatric admissions by a third after 5 years and substantial savings occurred in general hospital and psychiatric hospital bed days.
Abstract: Background Repetition of hospital-treated self-poisoning and admission to psychiatric hospital are both common in individuals who self-poison. Aims To evaluate efficacy of postcard intervention after 5 years. Method A randomised controlled trial of individuals who have self-poisoned: postcard intervention (eight in 12 months) plus treatment as usual v. treatment as usual. Our primary outcomes were self-poisoning admissions and psychiatric admissions (proportions and event rates). Results There was no difference between groups for any repeat-episode self-poisoning admission (intervention group: 24.9%, 95% CI 20.6-29.5; control group: 27.2%, 95% CI 22.8-31.8) but there was a significant reduction in event rates (incidence risk ratio (IRR) = 0.54, 95% CI 0.37-0.81), saving 306 bed days. There was no difference for any psychiatric admission (intervention group: 38.1%, 95% CI 33.1-43.2; control group: 35.5%, 95% CI 30.8-40.5) but there was a significant reduction in event rates (IRR = 0.66, 95% CI 0.47-0.91), saving 2565 bed days. Conclusions A postcard intervention halved self-poisoning events and reduced psychiatric admissions by a third after 5 years. Substantial savings occurred in general hospital and psychiatric hospital bed days.

158 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This work explored the reasons for declining help among patients who had significant emotional distress and found that depression was the leading cause of decline.
Abstract: Objective Many patients who experience distress do not seek help, and little is known about the reasons for this. We explored the reasons for declining help among patients who had significant emotional distress. Methods Data were collected through QUICATOUCH screening at an Australian hospital. Oncology outpatients scoring 4 or more on the Distress Thermometer were asked if they would ‘like help’ with their distress. Those who declined help were asked their reasons. Demographic variables and a clinical measure of anxiety and depression (PSYCH-6) were used to identify factors associated with reasons for declining help. Results Of 311 patients with significant distress, 221 (71%) declined help. The most common reasons were ‘I prefer to manage myself’ (n = 99, 46%); ‘already receiving help’ (n = 52, 24%) and ‘my distress is not severe enough’ (n = 50, 23%). Younger patients and women were more likely to decline help and were more likely to already be receiving help. Distress score and PSYCH-6 scores were significantly lower among patients who rated their distress as not severe enough to require help. Nevertheless, there were patients who had maximal scores on distress and PSYCH in each group. Conclusions Two common patient barriers to help with distress are a preference for self-help and a belief that distress is not sufficiently severe to warrant intervention. These beliefs were held by a sizeable proportion of individuals who reported very high levels of distress. Qualitative research and subsequent interventions for overcoming these barriers are required to obtain the most benefit from distress screening programs. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

127 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A reliable and valid questionnaire to measure the psychological consequences of screening mammography, which is potentially useful for assessing the Psychological consequences of the screening process and should have wide application.

117 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Ecological momentary assessment holds unique promise to advance the science and practice of clinical psychology by shedding light on the dynamics of behavior in real-world settings.
Abstract: Assessment in clinical psychology typically relies on global retrospective self-reports collected at research or clinic visits, which are limited by recall bias and are not well suited to address how behavior changes over time and across contexts. Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) involves repeated sampling of subjects’ current behaviors and experiences in real time, in subjects’ natural environments. EMA aims to minimize recall bias, maximize ecological validity, and allow study of microprocesses that influence behavior in real-world contexts. EMA studies assess particular events in subjects’ lives or assess subjects at periodic intervals, often by random time sampling, using technologies ranging from written diaries and telephones to electronic diaries and physiological sensors. We discuss the rationale for EMA, EMA designs, methodological and practical issues, and comparisons of EMA and recall data. EMA holds unique promise to advance the science and practice of clinical psychology by shedding ligh...

4,286 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The present report meta-analyzes more than 300 empirical articles describing a relationship between psychological stress and parameters of the immune system in human participants to find that physical vulnerability as a function of age or disease also increased vulnerability to immune change during stressors.
Abstract: The present report meta-analyzes more than 300 empirical articles describing a relationship between psychological stress and parameters of the immune system in human participants. Acute stressors (lasting minutes) were associated with potentially adaptive upregulation of some parameters of natural immunity and downregulation of some functions of specific immunity. Brief naturalistic stressors (such as exams) tended to suppress cellular immunity while preserving humoral immunity. Chronic stressors were associated with suppression of both cellular and humoral measures. Effects of event sequences varied according to the kind of event (trauma vs. loss). Subjective reports of stress generally did not associate with immune change. In some cases, physical vulnerability as a function of age or disease also increased vulnerability to immune change during stressors.

2,756 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The evidence-base of CBT is very strong and the strongest support exists for CBT of anxiety disorders, somatoform disorders, bulimia, anger control problems, and general stress.
Abstract: Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) refers to a popular therapeutic approach that has been applied to a variety of problems. The goal of this review was to provide a comprehensive survey of meta-analyses examining the efficacy of CBT. We identified 269 meta-analytic studies and reviewed of those a representative sample of 106 meta-analyses examining CBT for the following problems: substance use disorder, schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders, depression and dysthymia, bipolar disorder, anxiety disorders, somatoform disorders, eating disorders, insomnia, personality disorders, anger and aggression, criminal behaviors, general stress, distress due to general medical conditions, chronic pain and fatigue, distress related to pregnancy complications and female hormonal conditions. Additional meta-analytic reviews examined the efficacy of CBT for various problems in children and elderly adults. The strongest support exists for CBT of anxiety disorders, somatoform disorders, bulimia, anger control problems, and general stress. Eleven studies compared response rates between CBT and other treatments or control conditions. CBT showed higher response rates than the comparison conditions in seven of these reviews and only one review reported that CBT had lower response rates than comparison treatments. In general, the evidence-base of CBT is very strong. However, additional research is needed to examine the efficacy of CBT for randomized-controlled studies. Moreover, except for children and elderly populations, no meta-analytic studies of CBT have been reported on specific subgroups, such as ethnic minorities and low income samples.

2,107 citations

31 May 2006
TL;DR: This research highlights the need to understand more fully the rationale behind the continued use of EMMARM, as well as the barriers to doing so, in patients and clinicians.
Abstract: Peter Craig, MRC Population Health Sciences Research Network Paul Dieppe, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Oxford Sally Macintyre, MRC Social and Public Health Sciences Unit Susan Michie, Centre for Outcomes Research and Effectiveness, University College London Irwin Nazareth, MRC General Practice Research Framework Mark Petticrew, Department of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine

1,995 citations

BookDOI
01 Jan 2013
TL;DR: The present supplements to the fourth edition of the European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis lay a cornerstone for a new, completely revised fifth editions of the guidelines.
Abstract: The fourth edition of the European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis was published by the European Commission in 2006. The present supplements to the fourth edition have been produced by the same groups of experts originally established under the Europe Against Cancer programme that have developed and updated the guidelines since the early 1990s. Over the years, the scope and the depth of the multidisciplinary guidelines have expanded, and recommendations and protocols have been updated to keep pace with developments in the field. The present supplements lay a cornerstone for a new, completely revised fifth edition of the guidelines

1,333 citations