Thank you for your letter and your interest in PsyScan.1 We are glad to answer your questions. The participants were randomised before they had to sign the detailed informed consent. This was very important to us because we did not want the research to cause any delay in treatment, especially in the case of the participants in the control group. The numbers of participants who were excluded because they did not sign the informed consent were similar for both groups. This information is already given in the article, and we described that we used block randomisation and that the included numbers of participants were similar for both groups.
Second, the three-question distress screener has no direct influence on the advice and treatment the participants received. The diagnostic and therapeutic advices were based on the 4-Dimensional Symptom Questionnaire that has been researched extensively in general practice.
Third, we agree that Table 1 is crucial to understand the probable working mechanism of PsyScan. This table combined with the significant reduction of patient-reported symptoms indicates that PsyScan’s effect seems to be based on using more appropriate treatments for specific patients at specific times, resulting in better patient–treatment combinations.
Fourth, we ended the follow-up after 12 months. The presence of a statistically significant effect only after 12 months could indicate that PsyScan creates longer-lasting effects as opposed to usual care. As you pointed out, PsyScan indeed seems to create a better understanding between patient and GP.
- © British Journal of General Practice 2018
REFERENCE
- 1.↵