Task shifting – Ghana's community mental health workers’ experiences and perceptions of their roles and scope of practice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Because of the absence of adequate numbers of psychiatrists, the bulk of mental health care at the community level in Ghana is provided by community mental health workers (CMHWs). OBJECTIVE: To examine the role and scope of practice of CMHWs in Ghana from their own perspectives and to make recommendations to improve the care they provide. DESIGN: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of 164 CMHWs from all the 10 administrative regions of Ghana, comprising 71 (43.3%) community psychiatric nurses (CPNs), 19 (11.6%) clinical psychiatric officers (CPOs), and 74 (45.1%) community mental health officers (CMHOs). RESULTS: Overall, only 39 (23.8%) CMHWs worked closely with psychiatrists, 64 (39%) worked closely with social workers, 46 (28%) worked closely with psychologists and 13 (7.9%) worked closely with occupational therapists. A lower proportion of CMHOs worked closely with psychiatrists, psychologists, and social workers compared with CPOs and CPNs. There was no significant difference in the proportion of the different CMHW types who expressed confidence in their ability to diagnose any of the commonly named mental health conditions except personality disorders. However, a lower proportion of CMHOs than CPOs and CPNs expressed confidence in their ability to treat all the disorders. The CMHWs ranked schizophrenia as the most frequently treated mental health condition and there was no statistically significant difference in the reported frequency with which the three groups of CMHWs treated any of the mental health conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Mental health policy makers and coordinators need to thoroughly review the training curriculum and also evaluate the job descriptions of all CMHWs in Ghana to ensure that they are consistent with the demands and health-care needs of patients they care for in their communities. For example, as CMHOs and CPNs prescribe medication even though they are not expected to do so, it may be worth exploring the merits of including the prescription of common psychotropic medication in their training curriculum and job descriptions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".