MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2611087520 · doi:10.1186/s13063-017-1924-5

The effectiveness of a Supported Self-management task-shifting intervention for adult depression in Vietnam communities: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

2017· article· en· W2611087520 on OpenAlexafffund
Jill Murphy, Charles H. Goldsmith, Wayne Jones, Phạm Thị Kiều Oanh, Vu Cong Nguyen

Bibliographic record

VenueTrials · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Treatment and Access
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersGrand Challenges Canada
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialIntervention (counseling)Depression (economics)Mental healthVietnamesePsychiatryPhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Depressive disorders are one of the leading causes of disease and disability worldwide. In Vietnam, although epidemiological evidence suggests that depression rates are on par with global averages, services for depression are very limited. In a feasibility study that was implemented from 2013 to 2015, we found that a Supported Self-management (SSM) intervention showed promising results for adults with depression in the community in Vietnam. This paper describes the Mental Health in Adults and Children: Frugal Innovations (MAC-FI) trial protocol that will assess the effectiveness of the SSM intervention, delivered by primary care and social workers, to community-based populations of adults with depression in eight Vietnamese provinces. METHODS/DESIGN: The MAC-FI program will be assessed using a stepped-wedge, randomized controlled trial. Study participants are adults aged 18 years and over in eight provinces of Vietnam. Study participants will be screened at primary care centres and in the community by health and social workers using the Self-reporting Questionnaire-20 (SRQ-20). Patients scoring >7, indicating depression caseness, will be invited to participate in the study in either the SSM intervention group or the enhanced treatment as usual control group. Recruited participants will be further assessed using the World Health Organization's Disability Assessment Scale (WHODAS 2.0) and the Cut-down, Annoyed, Guilty, Eye-opener (CAGE) Questionnaire for alcohol misuse. Intervention-group participants will receive the SSM intervention, delivered with the support of a social worker or social collaborator, for a period of 2 months. Control- group participants will receive treatment as usual and a leaflet with information about depression. SRQ-20, WHODAS 2.0 and CAGE scores will be taken by blinded outcome assessors at baseline, after 1 month and after 2 months. The primary analysis method will be intention-to-treat. DISCUSSION: This study has the potential to add to the knowledge base about the effectiveness of a SSM intervention for adult depression that has been validated for the Vietnamese context. This trial will also contribute to the growing body of evidence about the effectiveness of low-cost, task-shifting interventions for use in low-resource settings, where specialist mental health services are often limited. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Retrospectively registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT03001063 . Registered on 20 December 2016.

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)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
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: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.228

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0080.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0160.007
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0050.003
Research integrity0.0080.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0680.009

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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.513
Teacher spread0.409 · 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
GenreProtocol

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

Citations20
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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