ArticleJournal of public health in Africa2022
Improving inter-rater reliability of the enhancing assessment of common therapeutic factors (ENACT) measure through training of raters.
Article in Journal of public health in Africa, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- A family-systemic intervention for mental health with refugees in Jordan: Protocol of a randomised controlled trial of StrongerTogether.Global mental health (Cambridge, England) · 2026Article
- Functional Independence Assessment in Children and Adolescents with Achondroplasia: A Multicenter Cross-Sectional Study Using the WeeFIM Scale.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Competency-based training and supervision: development of the WHO-UNICEF Ensuring Quality in Psychosocial and Mental Health Care (EQUIP) initiative.The lancet. Psychiatry · 2025Article
- Piloting competency assessments for an evidence-based brief psychological intervention with Arabic-speaking non-specialists in Switzerland.Global mental health (Cambridge, England) · 2025Article
- Advances in Psychotropic Treatment for Pregnant Women: Efficacy, Adverse Outcomes, and Therapeutic Monitoring.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Article
- Review
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 at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Background: As evidence supports task-shifting approaches to reduce the global mental health treatment gap, counselor competency evaluation measures are critical to ensure evidence-based therapies are administered with quality and fidelity. Objective: This article describes a training technique for evaluating lay counselors' competency for mental health lay practitioners without rating scale experience. Methods: Mental health practitioners were trained to give the Enhancing Assessment of Common Therapeutic Factors (ENACT) test to assess counselor proficiency in delivering the Common Elements Treatment Approach (CETA) in-person and over the phone using standardized video and audio recordings. A two-day in-person training was followed by a one-day remote training session. Training includes a review of item scales through didactic instructions, active learning by witnessing and scoring role-plays, peer interactions, and trainer observation and feedback. The trainees rated video and audio recordings, and ICC values were calculated. Results: The training technique presented in this research helped achieve high counselor competency scores among lay providers with no prior experience using rating scales. ICC rated both trainings satisfactory to exceptional (ICC: .71 - .89). Conclusions: Raters with no past experience with rating scales can achieve high consistency when rating counselor competency through training. Effective rater training should include didactic learning, practical learning with trainer observation and feedback, and video and audio recordings to assess consistency.
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.