This study examined the evidence from controlled studies for the effectiveness of consumer-led mental health services. Following an extensive search of material published in English from 1980, predefined inclusion criteria were systematically applied to research articles that compared a consumer-led mental health service to a traditional mental health service. A total of 29 eligible studies were appraised; all of them were conducted in high-income countries. Overall consumer-led services reported equally positive outcomes for their clients as traditional services, particularly for practical outcomes such as employment or living arrangements, and in reducing hospitalizations and thus the cost of services. Involving consumers in service delivery appears to provide employment opportunities and be beneficial overall for the consumer-staff members and the service. Despite growing evidence of effectiveness, barriers such as underfunding continue to limit the use and evaluation of consumer-led services. Future studies need to adopt more uniform definitions and prioritize the inclusion of recovery oriented outcome measures.

This study provides preliminary support for the use of WRAP to change consumers' and mental health professionals' knowledge and attitudes about recovery.

ObjectiveThis paper aims to present an overview of screening and safety considerations for the treatment of clinical depressive disorders and make recommendations for safety monitoring.MethodData were sourced by a literature search using MEDLINE and a manual search of scientific journals to identify relevant articles. Draft guidelines were prepared and serially revised in an iterative manner until all co-authors gave final approval of content.ResultsScreening and monitoring can detect medical causes of depression. Specific adverse effects associated with antidepressant treatments may be reduced or identified earlier by baseline screening and agent-specific monitoring after commencing treatment.ConclusionThe adoption of safety monitoring guidelines when treating clinical depression is likely to improve overall physical health status and treatment outcome. It is important to implement these guidelines in the routine management of clinical depression.

The absence of panic disorder and the low prevalence of any panic symptoms in those without bipolar or unipolar disorder suggest that panic is associated primarily with affective disorder within families with a history of bipolar disorder. Furthermore, panic disorder and symptoms are more common in bipolar disorder than in unipolar disorder in these families.