***TASK*** the task is to summarize an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***INPUT*** the input is a biomedical literature 
    ***OUTPUT*** the output is the summary of an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***DOCUMENTATION*** 
    ***EXAMPLES*** 
    Input: This special article pays tribute to Wayne Katon , MD ( 1950 - 2015 ) with a Gedenkschrift , or review , of his prolific academic career . Abstract s of all of Dr. Katon 's Medline citations were review ed to develop a narrative of his seminal epidemiological and interventional research findings . Specifically , we describe : ( a ) how Dr. Katon 's clinical work and observational epidemiology and health services research informed and guided interventional studies ; ( b ) the evolution of multidisciplinary interventional trials from primary care-based psychiatric consultation to primary care-based collaborative care for depression to multicondition collaborative care ; and ( c ) how Dr. Katon 's research has informed the work of other leading research ers in the field of psychosomatic medicine and helped develop a new generation of research ers at the interface of psychiatry and primary care . For more than three decades , Dr. Katon led a multidisciplinary research team that conducted seminal epidemiological studies and r and omized trials and that influenced the thinking and research in the field of psychiatry in a number of areas : ( a ) the importance and impact of mental disorders presenting in primary care setting s and ( b ) the organization of effective multidisciplinary care for primary care patients with common mental disorders and comorbid medical conditions . Dr. Katon 's work revolutionized the care of psychiatric illnesses in primary care and other medical care setting s to the benefit of countless patients worldwide BACKGROUND Patients with depression and poorly controlled diabetes , coronary heart disease , or both have an increased risk of adverse outcomes and high health care costs . We conducted a study to determine whether coordinated care management of multiple conditions improves disease control in these patients . METHODS We conducted a single-blind , r and omized , controlled trial in 14 primary care clinics in an integrated health care system in Washington State , involving 214 participants with poorly controlled diabetes , coronary heart disease , or both and coexisting depression . Patients were r and omly assigned to the usual-care group or to the intervention group , in which a medically supervised nurse , working with each patient 's primary care physician , provided guideline -based , collaborative care management , with the goal of controlling risk factors associated with multiple diseases . The primary outcome was based on simultaneous modeling of glycated hemoglobin , low-density lipoprotein ( LDL ) cholesterol , and systolic blood-pressure levels and Symptom Checklist-20 ( SCL-20 ) depression outcomes at 12 months ; this modeling allowed estimation of a single overall treatment effect . RESULTS As compared with controls , patients in the intervention group had greater overall 12-month improvement across glycated hemoglobin levels ( difference , 0.58 % ) , LDL cholesterol levels ( difference , 6.9 mg per deciliter [ 0.2 mmol per liter ] ) , systolic blood pressure ( difference , 5.1 mm Hg ) , and SCL-20 depression scores ( difference , 0.40 points ) ( P<0.001 ) . Patients in the intervention group also were more likely to have one or more adjustments of insulin ( P=0.006 ) , antihypertensive medications ( P<0.001 ) , and antidepressant medications ( P<0.001 ) , and they had better quality of life ( P<0.001 ) and greater satisfaction with care for diabetes , coronary heart disease , or both ( P<0.001 ) and with care for depression ( P<0.001 ) . CONCLUSIONS As compared with usual care , an intervention involving nurses who provided guideline -based , patient-centered management of depression and chronic disease significantly improved control of medical disease and depression . ( Funded by the National Institute of Mental Health ; Clinical Trials.gov number , NCT00468676 . ) OBJECTIVE To determine whether evidence -based socioculturally adapted collaborative depression care improves receipt of depression care and depression and diabetes outcomes in low-income Hispanic subjects . RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS This was a r and omized controlled trial of 387 diabetic patients ( 96.5 % Hispanic ) with clinical ly significant depression recruited from two public safety-net clinics from August 2005 to July 2007 and followed over 18 months .  Intervention ( INT group ) included problem-solving therapy and /or antidepressant medication based on a stepped-care algorithm ; first-line treatment choice ; telephone treatment response , adherence , and relapse prevention follow-up over 12 months ; plus systems navigation assistance . Enhanced usual care ( EUC group ) included st and ard clinic care plus patient receipt of depression educational pamphlets and a community re source list . RESULTS INT patients had significantly greater depression improvement ( ≥50 % reduction in Symptom Checklist-20 depression score from baseline ; 57 , 62 , and 62 % vs. the EUC group 's 36 , 42 , and 44 % at 6 , 12 , and 18 months , respectively ; odds ratio 2.46–2.57 ; P < 0.001 ) . Mixed-effects linear regression models showed a significant study group – by – time interaction over 18 months in diabetes symptoms ; anxiety ; Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form Health Survey ( SF-12 ) emotional , physical , and pain-related functioning ; Sheehan disability ; financial situation ; and number of social stressors ( P = 0.04 for disability and SF-12 physical functioning , P < 0.001 for all others ) but no study group – by – time interaction in A1C , diabetes complications , self-care management , or BMI . CONCLUSIONS Socioculturally adapted collaborative depression care improved depression , functional outcomes , and receipt of depression treatment in predominantly Hispanic patients in safety-net clinics OBJECTIVE This study examines clinical predictors of symptom deterioration ( relapse/recurrence ) at the completion of a clinical intervention trial of depressed , low-income , predominantly Hispanic diabetes patients who were r and omized to socio-culturally adapted collaborative depression treatment or usual care and who no longer met clinical ly significant depression criteria at 12 months post-trial baseline . METHODS A sub-cohort of 193 diabetes patients with major depression symptoms at baseline , who were r and omized to a 12-month collaborative care intervention ( INT ) ( problem-solving therapy and /or pharmacotherapy , telephone symptom monitoring/relapse prevention , behavioral activation and patient navigation support ) or enhanced usual care ( EUC ) , and who did not meet major depression criteria at 12 months were subsequently observed over 18 to 24 months . RESULTS Post-trial depression symptom deterioration was similar between INT ( 35.2 % ) and EUC ( 35.3 % ) groups . Among the combined groups , significant predictors of symptom deterioration were baseline history of previous depression and /or dysthymia ( odds ratio [ OR ] = 2.66 ) , 12-month PHQ-9 score ( OR = 1.22 ) , antidepressant treatment receipt during the initial 12-months ( OR = 2.38 ) , 12-month diabetes symptoms ( OR = 2.27 ) , and new ICD-9 medical diagnoses in the initial 12 months ( OR = 1.11 ) ( R2 = 27 % ; max-rescaled R2 = 37 % ; likelihood ratio test , χ2 = 59.79 , df = 5 , P < 0.0001 ) . CONCLUSIONS Among predominantly Hispanic diabetes patients in community safety net primary care clinics whose depression had improved over 1 year , more than one-third experienced symptom deterioration over the following year . A primary care management depression care protocol that includes ongoing depression symptom monitoring , antidepressant adherence , and diabetes and co-morbid illness monitoring plus depression medication adjustment and behavioral activation may reduce and /or effectively treat depression symptom deterioration Flaws in the design , conduct , analysis , and reporting of r and omised trials can cause the effect of an intervention to be underestimated or overestimated . The Cochrane Collaboration ’s tool for assessing risk of bias aims to make the process clearer and more CONTEXT Few depressed older adults receive effective treatment in primary care setting s. OBJECTIVE To determine the effectiveness of the Improving Mood-Promoting Access to Collaborative Treatment ( IMPACT ) collaborative care management program for late-life depression .  DESIGN R and omized controlled trial with recruitment from July 1999 to August 2001 . SETTING Eighteen primary care clinics from 8 health care organizations in 5 states . PARTICIPANTS A total of 1801 patients aged 60 years or older with major depression ( 17 % ) , dysthymic disorder ( 30 % ) , or both ( 53 % ) . INTERVENTION Patients were r and omly assigned to the IMPACT intervention ( n = 906 ) or to usual care ( n = 895 ) . Intervention patients had access for up to 12 months to a depression care manager who was supervised by a psychiatrist and a primary care expert and who offered education , care management , and support of antidepressant management by the patient 's primary care physician or a brief psychotherapy for depression , Problem Solving Treatment in Primary Care . MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Assessment s at baseline and at 3 , 6 , and 12 months for depression , depression treatments , satisfaction with care , functional impairment , and quality of life . RESULTS At 12 months , 45 % of intervention patients had a 50 % or greater reduction in depressive symptoms from baseline compared with 19 % of usual care participants ( odds ratio [ OR ] , 3.45 ; 95 % confidence interval [ CI ] , 2.71 - 4.38 ; P<.001 ) . Intervention patients also experienced greater rates of depression treatment ( OR , 2.98 ; 95 % CI , 2.34 - 3.79 ; P<.001 ) , more satisfaction with depression care ( OR , 3.38 ; 95 % CI , 2.66 - 4.30 ; P<.001 ) , lower depression severity ( range , 0 - 4 ; between-group difference , -0.4 ; 95 % CI , -0.46 to -0.33 ; P<.001 ) , less functional impairment ( range , 0 - 10 ; between-group difference , -0.91 ; 95 % CI , -1.19 to -0.64 ; P<.001 ) , and greater quality of life ( range , 0 - 10 ; between-group difference , 0.56 ; 95 % CI , 0.32 - 0.79 ; P<.001 ) than participants assigned to the usual care group . CONCLUSION The IMPACT collaborative care model appears to be feasible and significantly more effective than usual care for depression in a wide range of primary care practice OBJECTIVE This article describes the r and omized clinical trial methodology for a population -based study of oncology patients receiving cancer care in a public sector medical center . The primary goal is to test the effectiveness of socioculturally tailored collaborative care intervention in improving depression and quality of life outcomes among low-income ethnic minority patients with major depression and cancer . METHODS The Patient Health Question naire ( PHQ-9 ) depression scale was used to identify patients meeting criteria for major depression ( one cardinal depression symptom plus a PHQ-9 score of > or = 10 ) . Study -eligible patients were > /=90 days from cancer diagnosis who were receiving acute cancer treatment or follow-up care in oncology clinics . Patients with advanced disease limiting life expectancy to < 6 months , acutely suicidal or on antipsychotic medication were excluded . Allowing for attrition due to death or loss to follow-up , the study was powered at the 80 % level to detect a 20 % difference between study arms in the proportion of patients with > /=50 % reduction in PHQ-9 symptoms at 12 months . RESULTS Of 2330 patients screened , 23.2 % met criteria . An 82.4 % enrollment rate result ed in 446 primarily women being recruited and r and omized to intervention or usual care . CONCLUSION The study applies methods used in primary care depression trials with adaptations for oncology care clinics and for low-income minority patients In a pilot study , 55 low-income Latina patients with breast or cervical cancer and comorbid depression were r and omly assigned to receive collaborative care as part of the Multifaceted Oncology Depression Program or usual care . Relative to patients in the usual care condition , patients receiving collaborative care were more likely to show > or=50 % improvement in depressive symptoms as measured by the Personal Health Question naire ( OR=4.51 , 95 % CI=1.07 - 18.93 ) . Patients in the collaborative care program were also more likely to show improvement in emotional well-being ( increase of 2.15 ) as measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Scale than were those receiving usual care ( decrease of 0.50 ) ( group difference=2.65 , 95 % CI : 0.18 - 5.12 ) . Despite health system , provider , and patient barriers to care , these initial results suggest that patients in public sector oncology clinics can benefit from onsite depression treatment OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to determine sustained effectiveness in reducing depression symptoms and improving depression care 1 year following intervention completion . METHOD Of 387 low-income , predominantly Hispanic di 
    Output:
    
Discussion While limited by the number and variability of studies , the available research suggests that collaborative care for depression delivered by bilingual providers may be more effective than usual care among patients with LEP .