Cultural adaptation of cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) for patients with depression and anxiety in Saudi Arabia and Bahrain: a qualitative study exploring views of patients, carers, and mental health professionals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Western values influence cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) as it was primarily developed and practised in the West. As understanding the cultural context has been linked to better therapy outcomes, it has been suggested that CBT might need modification to non-Western clients’ cultural backgrounds. Previously we developed a cost-effective approach to adapt CBT for clients in China and Pakistan. In this study, we applied the same methodology for local clients suffering from depression and anxiety in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Bahrain. This study aimed to understand the views of patients with depression and anxiety, caregivers and mental health professionals about CBT to develop guidelines for culturally adapting CBT for depression and anxiety. We conducted semi-structured interviews with the patients ( n = 42), caregivers ( n = 11), and psychiatrists and psychologists ( n = 16). The data were analysed using a thematic framework analysis by identifying emerging themes and categories. The themes emerging from the analyses of interviews by each interviewer were compared and contrasted with those of other interviewers. The results highlighted barriers of access to and strengths of CBT while working with these patient groups. Patients and their caregivers in both countries use a bio-psycho-spiritual-social model of illness and seek help from multiple sources. Therapists emphasized the need for using local idioms, culturally appropriate translation and minor adjustments in therapy. There were no thematic differences between the two sites. These findings will be used to culturally adapt a CBT manual, which will be tested in a randomized controlled trial. Key learning aims After reading this article, readers will be able to: (1) Understand the need for cultural adaptation of CBT. (2) Identify the necessary steps to adapt CBT for the Muslim Arab population. (3) Understand the modifications required to deliver culturally adapted CBT for the Muslim Arab population.
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 | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".