The authors end this article with recommendations for psychiatry training goals.

Objective: We sought to evaluate two approaches with varying time and complexity in engaging adolescents with an Internet-based preventive intervention for depression in primary care. We conducted a randomized controlled trial comparing primary care physician motivational interview (MI, 10–15 minutes) + Internet program versus brief advice (BA, 2–3 minutes) + Internet program. Setting: Adolescent primary care patients in the United States, ages 14–21. Participants: 83 individuals (40% non-white) at increased risk for depressive disorders (sub-threshold depressed mood > 3–4 weeks) were randomly assigned to either the MI group (n=43) or the BA group (n=40). Main Outcome Measures: Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-A) – Adolescent and Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D). Results: Both groups substantially engaged the Internet site (MI, 90.7% versus BA 77.5%). For both groups, CES-D-10 scores declined (MI, 24.0 to 17.0 p < 0.001; BA, 25.2 to 15.5, p < 0.001). The percentage of those with clinically significant depression symptoms based on CES-D-10 scores declined in both groups from baseline to twelve weeks, (MI, 52% to 12%, p < 0.001; BA, 50% to 15%, p < 0.001). The MI group demonstrated declines in self-harm thoughts and hopelessness and was significantly less likely than the BA group to experience a depressive episode (4.65% versus 22.5%, p = 0.023) or to report hopelessness (MI group of 2% versus 15% for the BA group, p=0.044) by twelve weeks. Conclusions: An Internet-based prevention program in primary care is associated with declines in depressed mood and the likelihood of having clinical depression symptom levels in both groups. Motivational interviewing in combination with an Internet behavior change program may reduce the likelihood of experiencing a depressive episode and hopelessness.

Self-stigma can undermine self-esteem and self-efficacy of people with serious mental illness. Coming out may be one way of handling self-stigma and it was expected that coming out would mediate the effects of self-stigma on quality of life. This study compares coming out to other approaches of controlling self-stigma. Eighty-five people with serious mental illness completed measures of coming out (called the Coming Out with Mental Illness Scale, COMIS), self-stigma, quality of life, and strategies for managing self-stigma. An exploratory factor analysis of the COMIS uncovered two constructs: benefits of being out (BBO) and reasons for staying in. A mediational analysis showed BBO diminished self-stigma effects on quality of life. A factor analysis of measures of managing self-stigma yielded three factors. Benefits of being out was associated with two of these: affirming strategies and becoming aloof, not with strategies of shame. Implications for how coming out enhances the person’s quality of life are discussed.

This study identified key ingredients of consumer-directed antistigma programs. Part two of the mixed methods design, a quantitative cross-validation study, will yield a sound fidelity measure.

In-the-field navigation by peers seems to enhance service engagement, recovery, and quality of life. Whether these results occurred because navigators helped overcome barriers to treatment-regardless of whether they were peers per se-needs to be examined in future research.