Trial reportBMC health services research2024
Providers' perspectives of barriers and facilitators to scale-up of mental health care in the public health delivery system of Mozambique: a qualitative inquiry.
Trial report in BMC health services research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundA central challenge to closing the mental health treatment gap in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) is determining the most effective pathway for delivering evidence-based mental health services. We are conducting a cluster-randomized, Type 2 hybrid implementation-effectiveness trial across 20 districts of Mozambique called the Partnerships in Research to Implement and Disseminate Sustainable and Scalable EBPs (PRIDE) program. Following training of nonspecialized providers in facilitation of evidence-based treatments for mental health and informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), we identified how PRIDE compares to care as usual and the perceived barriers and facilitators of implementation and modifications needed for widescale service delivery and scale-up.
methodsWe conducted rapid ethnographic assessment using freelisting among 34 providers, followed by four focus group discussions (n = 29 participants) with a subsample of psychiatric technicians and primary care providers from 14 districts in Nampula Province. We used Thematic Analysis to inductively apply open codes to transcripts and then deductively applied the CFIR domains and constructs to organize open codes.
resultsThe main Outer Setting constructs relevant to implementation were recognition that patient mental health needs were significant. Additionally, numerous community-level characteristics were identified as barriers, including distance between clinics; shortage of providers; and low awareness of mental health problems, stigma, and discrimination among community members towards those with mental health struggles. The PRIDE program was perceived to offer a relative advantage over usual care because of its use of task-sharing and treating mental illness in the community. PRIDE addressed Inner Setting barriers of having available resources and training and provider low self-efficacy and limited knowledge of mental illness. Providers recommended leadership engagement to give support for supervision of other task-shared professionals delivering mental healthcare.
conclusionsPrimary care providers and psychiatric technicians in Mozambique perceived the relative advantage of the PRIDE program to address mental health treatment access barriers and offered recommendations for successful sustainment and scale up of integrated mental health care.
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.