Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29507742›Full record

ArticleGlobal mental health (Cambridge, England)2018

A qualitative evaluation of a brief multicomponent intervention provided by lay health workers for women affected by adversity in urban Kenya.

Edith Van't Hof, Katie S Dawson, Alison Schafer, Anna Chiumento, Melissa Harper Shehadeh, Marit Sijbrandij, Richard A Bryant, Dorothy Anjuri, Phiona Koyiet, Lincoln Ndogoni and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Global mental health (Cambridge, England), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. PTSD as a Public Mental Health Priority.Current psychiatry reports · 2019
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Edith Van't HofDepartment of Mental Health and Substance Abuse, World Health Organisation, Geneva, Switzerland.
Katie S DawsonUniversity of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Alison SchaferWorld Vision International, Burwood East, Victoria, Australia.
Anna ChiumentoUniversity of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Melissa Harper ShehadehDepartment of Mental Health and Substance Abuse, World Health Organisation, Geneva, Switzerland.
Marit SijbrandijVU University, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Richard A BryantUniversity of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Dorothy AnjuriWorld Vision Kenya, Nairobi, Kenya.
Phiona KoyietWorld Vision Kenya, Nairobi, Kenya.
Lincoln NdogoniPsychosocial Support Center, Nairobi, Kenya.
Jeannette UlateWorld Vision Canada, Missossauga, Canada.
Mark van OmmerenDepartment of Mental Health and Substance Abuse, World Health Organisation, Geneva, Switzerland.

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundProblem Management Plus (PM+) is a brief multicomponent intervention incorporating behavioral strategies delivered by lay health workers. The effectiveness of PM+ has been evaluated in randomized controlled trials in Kenya and Pakistan. When developing interventions for large-scale implementation it is considered essential to evaluate their feasibility and acceptability in addition to their efficacy. This paper discusses a qualitative evaluation of PM+ for women affected by adversity in Kenya.

methodsQualitative interviews were conducted with 27 key informants from peri-urban Nairobi, Kenya, where PM+ was tested. Interview participants included six women who completed PM+, six community health volunteers (CHVs) who delivered the intervention, seven people with local decision making power, and eight project staff involved in the PM+ trial.

resultsKey informants generally noted positive experiences with PM+. Participants and CHVs reported the positive impact PM+ had made on their lives. Nonetheless, potential structural and psychological barriers to scale up were identified. The sustainability of CHVs as unsalaried, volunteer providers was mentioned by most interviewees as the main barrier to scaling up the intervention.

conclusionsThe findings across diverse stakeholders show that PM+ is largely acceptable in this Kenyan setting. The results indicated that when further implemented, PM+ could be of great value to people in communities exposed to adversities such as interpersonal violence and chronic poverty. Barriers to large-scale implementation were identified, of which the sustainability of the non-specialist health workforce was the most important one.

Indexed as

Adversityinterventionmental health

Identifiers

PMID29507742
PMCPMC5827418

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.