How effective are walk-in mental health centers for young people with psychological distress in Europe and Australia?

Effectiveness and public health impact of walk-in Youth mEntal heAltH support centres: a hybrid (cost-)effectiveness-implementation study in seven European countries and Australia

Status

Recruiting

Phases

Unknown

Study type

Observational

Source

ISRCTN

Registry ID

ISRCTN13725260

Enrollment

1220

Registered

2025-12-09

Start date

2026-02-12

Completion date

Unknown

Last updated

2026-03-09

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Prevention and early intervention of mental disorders in youth with psychological distress Mental and Behavioural Disorders

Interventions

The YEAH study is a hybrid effectiveness-implementation design conducted as a prospective, multi-country, quasi-experimental cohort study with non-equivalent groups. Study participants will be recruit

Controls will be recruited from corresponding catchment areas and statistically matched. Outcome data will be collected at four time points: baseline (t0), 3-months (t1), 6-months (t2), and 12-months

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

All

Age

12 Years to 25 Years

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: 1. Age 12-25 years 2. Experimental condition only: First presentation to YEAH (earlier or consecutive counselling or mental health service use is allowed) 3. Presence of clinically meaningful psychological distress operationalized as a score of >10 on the CORE-10 4. Willingness to participate, 5. Ability to give informed consent 6. Parental consent for minors, if applicable

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: 1. Insufficient command of the local study language(s) to provide valid answers to self-report questionnaires (Estonian, German, Italian, English, Spanish, or Dutch) 2. Acute suicidality or acute threat to others

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
Clinical effectiveness defined as psychological distress measured using the CORE-10 at 6-month follow-up (t2)	—

Secondary

Measure	Time frame
Clinical effectiveness: 1. Psychological distress measured with the CORE-10 at 3- (t1) and 12-month follow-up (t3) 2. Quality of life and wellbeing measured with MyLifeTracker at 3- (t1), 6- (t2), and 12-month (t3) follow-up 3. User satisfaction using adapted items from the Jigsaw satisfaction survey at 3- (t1), 6- (t2), and 12-month (t3) follow-up Health economic evaluation: 1. Cost effectiveness: cost per unit decrease in psychological distress, measured using the CORE-10 2. Cost-utility analysis (cost per quality adjusted life years (QALYs) measured using the EQ-5D-5L except in the UK and Ireland where the EQ-5D-3L will be used 3. Costs of interventions measured using a Resource Use Measurement tailored to reflect the structure of the health system in each country	—

Measure

Time frame

Clinical effectiveness: 1. Psychological distress measured with the CORE-10 at 3- (t1) and 12-month follow-up (t3) 2. Quality of life and wellbeing measured with MyLifeTracker at 3- (t1), 6- (t2), and 12-month (t3) follow-up 3. User satisfaction using adapted items from the Jigsaw satisfaction survey at 3- (t1), 6- (t2), and 12-month (t3) follow-up Health economic evaluation: 1. Cost effectiveness: cost per unit decrease in psychological distress, measured using the CORE-10 2. Cost-utility analysis (cost per quality adjusted life years (QALYs) measured using the EQ-5D-5L except in the UK and Ireland where the EQ-5D-3L will be used 3. Costs of interventions measured using a Resource Use Measurement tailored to reflect the structure of the health system in each country

—

Countries

Australia, England, Estonia, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Netherlands, Spain, United Kingdom

Contacts

Public ContactJule Leickert

jule.leickert@charite.de+49 (0)15114552161

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ISRCTN (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Mar 14, 2026