Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36202129›Full record

Trial reportThe lancet. Healthy longevity2022

A task-shared, collaborative care psychosocial intervention for improving depressive symptomatology among older adults in a socioeconomically deprived area of Brazil (PROACTIVE): a pragmatic, two-arm, parallel-group, cluster-randomised controlled trial.

Marcia Scazufca, Carina A Nakamura, Nadine Seward, Darío Moreno-Agostino, Pepijn van de Ven, William Hollingworth, Tim J Peters, Ricardo Araya

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialPragmatic Clinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in The lancet. Healthy longevity, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.1field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Marcia ScazufcaInstituto de Psiquiatria, Hospital das Clinicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil; Departamento de Psiquiatria, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
Carina A NakamuraDepartamento de Psiquiatria, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
Nadine SewardHealth Service and Population Research, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
Darío Moreno-AgostinoHealth Service and Population Research, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK; ESRC Centre for Society and Mental Health, King's College London, London, UK; Centre for Longitudinal Studies, Social Research Institute, University College London, London, UK.
Pepijn van de VenHealth Research Institute, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland.
William HollingworthHealth Economics Bristol, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Tim J PetersBristol Dental School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Ricardo ArayaHealth Service and Population Research, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK. Electronic address: ricardo.araya@kcl.ac.uk.
University of Bristol · GBKing's College London · GBUniversidade de São Paulo · BRUniversity of Limerick · IE

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/R006229/1Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is an urgent need to reduce the burden of depression among older adults in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of a task-shared, collaborative care psychosocial intervention for improving recovery from depression in older adults in Brazil.

methodsPROACTIVE was a pragmatic, two-arm, parallel-group, cluster-randomised controlled trial conducted in Guarulhos, Brazil. Primary care clinics (clusters) were stratified by educational level and randomly allocated (1:1) to either enhanced usual care alone (control group) or to enhanced usual care plus the psychosocial intervention (intervention group), which involved a 17-week psychosocial programme based on psychoeducation and behavioural activation approaches. Individuals approached for the initial screening assessment were selected randomly from a list of individuals provided by the Health Secretariat of Guarulhos. Face-to-face baseline assessments were conducted among adults aged 60 years or older registered with one of the primary care clinics and identified with clinically significant depressive symptomatology (9-item Patient Health Questionnaire [PHQ-9] score ≥10). Community health workers delivered the programme through home sessions, supported by a dedicated tablet application. Masking of clinic staff and community health workers who delivered the intervention was not feasible; however, research assistants conducting recruitment and follow-up assessments were masked to trial allocation. The primary outcome was recovery from depression (PHQ-9 score <10) at 8-month follow-up. All primary analyses were performed by intention to treat with imputed data. Adaptations to the protocol were made due to the COVID-19 pandemic; recruitment and intervention home sessions were stopped, and follow-up assessments were conducted by telephone. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN57805470.

findingsWe identified 24 primary care clinics in Guarulhos that were willing to participate, of which 20 were randomly allocated to either the control group (ten [50%] clusters) or to the intervention group (ten [50%] clusters). The four remaining eligible clusters were kept as reserves. Between May 23, 2019, and Feb 21, 2020, 8146 individuals were assessed for eligibility, of whom 715 (8·8%) participants were recruited: 355 (49·7%) in the control group and 360 (50·3%) in the intervention group. 284 (80·0%) participants in the control group and 253 (70·3%) in the intervention group completed follow-up at 8 months. At 8-month follow-up, 158 (62·5%) participants in the intervention group showed recovery from depression (PHQ-9 score <10) compared with 125 (44·0%) in the control group (adjusted odds ratio 2·16 [95% CI 1·47-3·18]; p<0·0001). These findings were maintained in the complete case analysis. No adverse events related to the intervention were observed.

interpretationAlthough the COVID-19 pandemic altered delivery of the intervention, the low-intensity psychosocial intervention delivered mainly by non-mental health professionals was highly efficacious in improving recovery from depression in older adults in Brazil. Our results support a low-resource intervention that could be useful to reduce the treatment gap for depression among older people in other LMICs.

fundingSão Paulo Research Foundation and Joint Global Health Trials (UK Department for International Development, Medical Research Council, and the Wellcome Trust).

Indexed as

COVID-19Psychosocial InterventionAgedBrazilHumansPandemicsTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID36202129
PMCPMC9529612
OpenAlexW4300816932

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.