MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409616283 · doi:10.1101/2025.04.17.25325391

Behavioural activation for low mood and anxiety in male frontline NHS workers (BALM): a pre-post intervention study

2025· preprint· en· W4409616283 on OpenAlexaff
Paul Galdas, Della Bailey, Steve Bell, Kate Bosanquet, Carolyn Chew‐Graham, David Ekers, Simon Gilbody, Michael G. Mawhinney, Heidi Stevens, Katie Webb, Dean McMillan

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth, psychology, and well-being
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersMovember Foundation
KeywordsMoodAnxietyIntervention (counseling)PsychologyClinical psychologyMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Objectives To evaluate the impact and acceptability of a tailored, gender-responsive behavioural activation intervention for improving depression and anxiety in male NHS frontline workers. Design Pre-post intervention study. Setting Three National Health Service (NHS) organisations in the North of England. Participants Forty-five men aged ≥ 18 years working in a frontline NHS role scoring in the subclinical range (5-14) on the PHQ-9 (depression) and/or the GAD-7 (anxiety) at baseline. Interventions A tailored Behavioural Activation treatment programme consisting of up to eight telephone support sessions over a period of 4–6 weeks, accompanied by a Behavioural Activation self-help manual. Main outcome measures Self-reported symptom severity of depression, assessed by PHQ-9, and anxiety, assessed by GAD-7, at baseline and 4- and 6-months. Acceptability from the perspectives of male study participants and coaches who delivered the intervention was assessed in a nested qualitative study using the theoretical framework of acceptability (TFA). Results PHQ-9 and GAD-7 scores decreased from baseline to 4 months on both the PHQ-9 and GAD-7. While scores increased from 4 months to 6 months, the 6-month scores remained below those of the baseline scores. Acceptability of the intervention was high across all constructs of the TFA. The practical and action-oriented strategies of the intervention, and the confidential, flexible, convenient mode of delivery, worked to support men’s engagement with the intervention. Conclusions Delivery of a tailored, gender-responsive Behavioural Activation intervention was appealing to, and beneficial for, men working in frontline NHS roles with less severe depression and anxiety. The BALM intervention offers promise as a tailored workplace mental health programme that is aligned with men’s needs and preferences and can help overcome a reticence to engage with mental health support in NHS staff and beyond. Trial registration ISRCTN 48636092 Strengths and limitations of this study This is the first study to evaluate the impact and acceptability of a Behavioural Activation intervention for improving depression and anxiety in men using a gendered lens, contributing novel findings of relevance wider than the study context. The use of the TFA to inform data collection and analysis enabled a theoretically informed, systematic evaluation of the acceptability of the intervention. Rich data were gathered from qualitative interviews with a large sample of male participants and coaches who supported intervention delivery, including participant non-completers. Participants were a self-selecting sample of men who may have been particularly motivated to take part in the intervention. It is possible their views on the acceptability of the Behavioural Activation (BALM) intervention are more positive than the wider population of male NHS staff. Our sample also lacked ethnocultural diversity and representation of some NHS staff groups, particularly ancillary roles, that limits the transferability of the findings. The quasi-experimental research design is not sufficiently reliable to make causal inferences.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.443
Teacher spread0.391 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxivSame topicHealth, psychology, and well-beingFrench-language works237,207