There were 14,764 participants across the selected studies, with 7,431 participants having received IPBH (n = 7,431; 50.33%) and 7,333 having received an alternative treatment (n = 7,333; 49.67%).
Effect sizes, 95% confidence intervals, and p-values for studies evaluating integrated primary and behavioral healthcare (IPBH) for decreasing mental health symptoms using treatment-as-usual comparison groups.
The 36 effect sizes included in the analysis of IPBH versus TAU for reducing mental health symptoms (N = 14,764) yielded a mean effect size of -0.31 (CI95 = -0.38, -0.24), [rho] < .01, [[tau].sup.2] = 0.03, indicative of a small effect size and suggesting that the null hypothesis related to therapeutic superiority of IPBH can be rejected.
Visual inspection of scatterplots and regression lines indicated that IPBH protocols characterized by a team of three providers and approximately eight behavioral health interventions tended to be associated with results near the mean effect.
The 29 effect sizes included in the analysis of IPBH versus TAU for reducing mental health symptoms (N = 9,645) yielded a mean effect size of -.32 (CI95 = -0.40, -0.24), [rho] < .01, [[tau].sup.2]= 0.03, indicative of a small effect size and suggesting that the null hypothesis related to therapeutic superiority of IPBH can be rejected.
The results of this meta-analysis provided a synthesized depiction of IPBH effectiveness and characteristics that may moderate client outcomes.
For perspective, IPBH yielded a mean effect size that was more than double that of other well-accepted medical protocols such as the use of aspirin or statins for treating cardiovascular diseases (g = 0.12 and 0.15, respectively; Leucht, Heifer, Gartlehner, & Davis, 2015).
Inspection of our moderation analyses across endof-treatment and follow-up comparisons indicated two consistent predictors of treatment effectiveness: (a) number of providers on the IPBH team and (b) number of sessions that comprised the behavioral health intervention protocol.
We suggest that the distinctive roles of counselors within an IPBH paradigm will likely be a function of the individual setting.
The IPBH paradigm also requires mental health counselors to exhibit several knowledge and skill competencies that may not have been emphasized within their professional preparation curriculum.
Given the small number of well-established IPBH settings nationally, practicum and internship opportunities that develop fundamental IPBH skills likely are not abundant.