Barriers and Facilitators to Father’s Engagement in a Depression and Alcohol Use Intervention in Kenya: Father, Family, and Community Factors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Kenya, there is a treatment gap for depression and alcohol use that is especially large for fathers, which has consequences for families. While treatments exist, there are challenges to implementation. This study aimed to understand barriers and facilitators to implementing a treatment for fathers' depression and alcohol use in Eldoret, Kenya. Guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and the Integrated Sustainability Framework, we conducted 18 key informant interviews and 7 focus group discussions (31 total participants) with stakeholders in Eldoret (hospital leaders, policy makers, mental health providers, community leaders, fathers, lay providers, and patients previously engaged in treatment). Interviews were analyzed using the framework method; themes were matrixed by framework domains. Participants identified barriers and facilitators, and opportunities for implementation, in the following domains: innovation, outer setting, inner setting, individual, sustainability, and characteristics of systems. Barriers included a lack of resources, stigma, masculine norms, cost of services, and alcohol dependence. Facilitators included community buy-in, family support, providers with lived experience, government support, and relevant treatment content. Findings will inform implementation strategy development for an intervention for fathers with depression and alcohol use, and family problems with local relevance and scalable potential.
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 | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".