Distribution of 84 patients who were cold called and summary of their responses
| Number of patients | Category of assistance (see coding below)* | Examples | |
|---|---|---|---|
| *0 = not particularly helped, 1 = helped via contact with GP, 2 = helped by contact with voluntary agencies, 3 = helped by personal support at interview, 4 = helped by referral to mental health services, 5 = helped in other ways. | |||
| NB: 17 (20%) gave information that was perceived as valuable to care. This compared with 6 (6%) of the 100 patients who responded to the initial referral letter and were not cold called. | |||
| Positive response to cold calling (n=58) (including 3 who were very positive) | 45 | 0 | |
| 4 | 1 | patient was taking antidepressants irregularly (<1/day); advised to take prescribed dose and GP informed | |
| 1 | 2 | referral to CRUSE for patient who had unresolved suffering following bereavement | |
| 3 | 3 | assertive help to elderly patient living alone | |
| 3 | 4 | rereferral of patient to day hospital after first failing to attend because of agoraphobia | |
| 2 | 5 | error found in medical records in which patient confused with another one of same name with schizophrenia | |
| Neutral response to cold calling (n=16) | 14 | 0 | |
| 2 | 3 | patient reluctant to see researcher at first but later disclosed information about past abuse that had not been disclosed previously. Intervention viewed as a positive experience | |
| Negative response to cold calling (n=10)
 (including 2 who were very dissatisfied) | 8 | 0 | |
| 1 | 3 | patient very concerned about researcher examining GP notes but described many family difficulties at interview for which solutions were found | |
| 1 | 5 | patient subsequently became involved in antisocial acts and police contacted researchers about his dangerousness—reassured that this was unlikely and no further action taken | |