Trial reportGlobal health action2021
Fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis of implementation outcomes in an integrated mental healthcare trial in South Africa.
Trial report in Global health action, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Inverting the deficit model in global mental health: An examination of strengths and assets of community mental health care in Ghana, India, Occupied Palestinian territories, and South Africa.PLOS global public health · 2024Article
- Strengthening integrated depression services within routine primary health care using the RE-AIM framework in South Africa.PLOS global public health · 2023Article
- Mental Healthcare Services for Persons With Communication Disorders: Experiences of Mental Health Professionals in Gauteng.International journal of language & communication disordersArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIntegrating mental health services into primary healthcare platforms is an established health systems strategy in low-to-middle-income countries. In South Africa, this was pursued through the Programme for Improving Mental Health Care (PRIME), a multi-country initiative that relied on task-sharing as a principle implementation strategy. Towards better describing the implementation processes, qualitative comparative analysis was adopted to explore causal pathways in the intervention.
objectiveThis study aimed to explore factors that could have influenced key outcomes of an integrated mental healthcare intervention in South Africa.
methodsDrawing from an embedded multiple case study design, the analysis used qualitative comparative analysis. Focusing on nine PHC clinics in the Dr Kenneth Kaunda District as cases, with depression reduction scores set as outcome measures, trial data variables were modelled in a hypothetical causal process. A fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis was performed by 1) developing the research questions, 2) developing the fuzzy set, 3) testing necessity and 4) testing sufficiency. These steps were undertaken collaboratively among the research team.
resultsThe data were calibrated during several meetings among team members to gain a degree of consensus. Necessity analyses suggested that none of the causal conditions exceeded the threshold of necessity and triviality, and confirmed the inclusion of relevant variables in line with the proposed models. Sufficiency analyses produced two configurations, which were subjected to standard and specific analyses. Ultimately, the results suggested that none of the causal conditions were necessary for a reduction in depression scores to occur, while programme fidelity was identified as a sufficient condition for a reduction in scores to occur.
conclusionsThe study highlights the importance of understanding implementation pathways to enable better integration of mental health services within primary healthcare in low-to-middle-income settings. It underlines the importance of programme fidelity in achieving the goals of implementation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.