Barriers and Facilitators to Implementing a Community-Based Psychosocial Support Intervention Conducted In-Person and Remotely: A Qualitative Study in Quibdó, Colombia
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Community-based psychosocial support group (CB-PSS) interventions using task-shifting approaches are well suited to provide culturally appropriate services in low- and middle-income countries. However, contextual barriers and facilitators must be considered to tailor interventions effectively, particularly considering the challenges introduced by the COVID-19 pandemic. We explore the barriers, facilitators, and psychosocial changes associated with implementing a CB-PSS group intervention delivered by local lay providers to conflict-affected adults in Quibdó, Colombia, using both in-person and remote modalities. Data were analyzed from 25 individual interviews with participants and a focus group discussion involving staff members, including 7 community psychosocial agent facilitators and 2 mental health professional supervisors. The analysis used a thematic approach grounded in a descriptive phenomenology to explore the lived experiences of participants and staff members during implementation. Participant attendance in the in-person modality was compromised by factors such as competing work and family responsibilities and disruption caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants in the remote modality faced challenges concerning unstable Internet connectivity, recurrent power outages caused by heavy rain, distractions, interruptions, and threats to confidentiality by family and coworkers. Despite these challenges, data revealed key contextual facilitators, including the community-based knowledge of facilitators and integration of traditional practices, such as the <i>comadreo</i> (informal talks and gatherings). Respondents shared that the CB-PSS groups promoted stronger community relationships and created opportunities for participants to exchange peer support, practice leadership skills, develop problem-solving skills based on peers’ experiences, and enhance emotional regulation skills. Differences and similarities across in-person and remote modalities are discussed, as are key considerations for practitioners and policymakers.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it