MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2563441254 · doi:10.1001/jama.2016.19102

Effect of a Primary Care–Based Psychological Intervention on Symptoms of Common Mental Disorders in Zimbabwe

2016· article· en· W2563441254 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Dixon Chibanda, Helen A. Weiss, Ruth Verhey, Victoria Simms, Ronald Munjoma, Simbarashe Rusakaniko, Alfred Chingono, Epiphania Munetsi, Tarisai Bere, Ethel Manda, Melanie Abas, Ricardo Araya

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Treatment and Access
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedical Research CouncilGrand Challenges CanadaLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
KeywordsMedicineMental healthRandomized controlled trialAnxietyPsychological interventionDepression (economics)Intervention (counseling)Interquartile rangePeer supportPsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Importance: Depression and anxiety are common mental disorders globally but are rarely recognized or treated in low-income settings. Task-shifting of mental health care to lay health workers (LHWs) might decrease the treatment gap. Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of a culturally adapted psychological intervention for common mental disorders delivered by LHWs in primary care. Design, Setting, and Participants: Cluster randomized clinical trial with 6 months' follow-up conducted from September 1, 2014, to May 25, 2015, in Harare, Zimbabwe. Twenty-four clinics were randomized 1:1 to the intervention or enhanced usual care (control). Participants were clinic attenders 18 years or older who screened positive for common mental disorders on the locally validated Shona Symptom Questionnaire (SSQ-14). Interventions: The Friendship Bench intervention comprised 6 sessions of individual problem-solving therapy delivered by trained, supervised LHWs plus an optional 6-session peer support program. The control group received standard care plus information, education, and support on common mental disorders. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome was common mental disorder measured at 6 months as a continuous variable via the SSQ-14 score, with a range of 0 (best) to 14 and a cutpoint of 9. The secondary outcome was depression symptoms measured as a binary variable via the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire, with a range of 0 (best) to 27 and a cutpoint of 11. Outcomes were analyzed by modified intention-to-treat. Results: Among 573 randomized patients (286 in the intervention group and 287 in the control group), 495 (86.4%) were women, median age was 33 years (interquartile range, 27-41 years), 238 (41.7%) were human immunodeficiency virus positive, and 521 (90.9%) completed follow-up at 6 months. Intervention group participants had fewer symptoms than control group participants on the SSQ-14 (3.81; 95% CI, 3.28 to 4.34 vs 8.90; 95% CI, 8.33 to 9.47; adjusted mean difference, -4.86; 95% CI, -5.63 to -4.10; P < .001; adjusted risk ratio [ARR], 0.21; 95% CI, 0.15 to 0.29; P < .001). Intervention group participants also had lower risk of symptoms of depression (13.7% vs 49.9%; ARR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.22 to 0.34; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: Among individuals screening positive for common mental disorders in Zimbabwe, LHW-administered, primary care-based problem-solving therapy with education and support compared with standard care plus education and support resulted in improved symptoms at 6 months. Scaled-up primary care integration of this intervention should be evaluated. Trial Registration: pactr.org Identifier: PACTR201410000876178.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.359 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations485
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAMASame topicMental Health Treatment and AccessFrench-language works237,207