Community-based mental health screening & referral for flood-affected women in rural Pakistan: an intervention feasibility study protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: South Asia carries the burden of a rapidly changing climate with floods and extreme heat. These disasters further translate into mental health distress, financial stress and detrimental effects on well-being, with women being the most vulnerable. This study aims to demonstrate that mental health screening, referral and resilience-building group sessions can be successfully administered by community health workers and primary health facility staff in a flood-affected rural population of women in Pakistan and provide evidence on the effectiveness of this approach for improving their mental health status. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A quasi-experimental design with a comparison group will be used for the study, preceded by a formative phase. The formative phase evaluated the feasibility of mental health screening by Lady Health Workers (LHWs) in flood-affected areas using a qualitative approach such as focus group discussions and in-depth interviews. Manuals developed by the study team of mPareshan will be used to train LHWs, Lady Health Supervisors (LHS) and health facility staff. Following this, LHWs will briefly screen women aged 18 to 49 years, administer awareness-raising and resilience-building sessions and refer women who screen positive for depression or anxiety to a primary health facility. Physicians at the health facility will confirm the diagnosis and provide counselling to mild-moderate cases, while severe cases would be referred to specialists. Statistical evaluation of quantitative data and thematic content analysis of qualitative data will be conducted to assess the feasibility and impact of the intervention. This trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov with number NCT06756165. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study acquired ethical approval from the Ethical Review Committee at Aga Khan University (2024-10475-30776) and the National Bioethics Committee (4-87/NBC-1158/23/481) in Islamabad. Approval was obtained from relevant provincial authorities. The trial will adhere to the ethical principles of autonomy, anonymity, confidentiality, equity and respect. All eligible participants will be provided with informed consent, details regarding the purpose and procedure of the study, and the right to withdraw at any time. Data and information will be anonymised and stored securely. Dissemination of the results of the trial will occur after its completion to stakeholders, participants and the public. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT06756165.
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 | 0.021 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.038 | 0.006 |
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".