Volume 9 — December 06, 2012
Examining External Validity in Efficacy and Secondary Articles of Home-Based Depression Care Management Interventions for Older Adults
Of the 8 articles describing DCM home interventions, 2 were excluded from our analysis because the interventions were not effective. From the 6 efficacy articles eligible for review, 11 secondary articles were identified. Three of the secondary articles were excluded because they had no information about external validity, leaving 8 secondary articles eligible for review. The 6 efficacy articles and the 8 secondary articles brought the total to 14 articles eligible for review.
Figure 1. Flow diagram of process used to identify eligible efficacy and secondary articles of depression care management (DCM) home interventions for older adults. The initial 8 articles were identified in the systematic review of depression interventions conducted by Frederick and colleagues (1).
The opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors' affiliated institutions.