Trial reportBMC psychiatry2025
A cluster-randomized trial of interventions for adolescent mental disorders in Zimbabwe.
Trial report in BMC psychiatry, 2025. 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.
- The African youth in mind (Y-MIND) brief psychological intervention for depression among school-going adolescents in Ghana: a development case series.BMC psychiatry · 2026Trial
- Acceptability and feasibility of the Ushirikiano treatment model for Kenyan adolescents: a pilot randomized controlled trial.Frontiers in child and adolescent psychiatry · 2026Trial
- Effectiveness of Friendship Bench in Alleviating Anxiety and Depression Symptoms Among People Living with HIV and High-Risk Populations: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.AIDS and behavior · 2026Review
- From research to practice: a qualitative study examining the integration of telehealth-based suicide prevention in HIV care in Tanzania.AIDS care · 2026Article
- Youth peer-based mental health programmes and supports in low- and middle-income countries: rapid review.BJPsych open · 2026Review
- Amplifying Coaches' voices from the implementation of the MindSKILLZ youth mental health program in Kenya: A critical discourse analysis.PLOS global public health · 2026Article
- Problem-Solving and Behavioural Activation for Young Mothers with Depression in Harare, Zimbabwe: A Mixed-Methods Case Series.Epidemiologia (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
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
purposeYoung people have low uptake of mental health. We compared two task-shifted mental health care models, i.e., adult Friendship Bench (FB) delivered by community health workers and Youth Friendship Bench (YouFB) delivered by trained university students in Harare, Zimbabwe. We hypothesised that the peer-delivered YouFB would have greater uptake and effectiveness in managing common mental disorders (CMDs) in 16-19-year-olds compared to the standard FB model. We also aimed to evaluate the reach, fidelity, acceptability and cost of the YouFB compared to standard FB.
methodsWe conducted an open-label cluster-randomised, hybrid type-2 implementation trial with cost analysis in 26 primary care clinics and their surrounding communities. Facilities were randomised 1:1 to FB or YouFB. The primary implementation outcome was uptake, defined as the proportion of adolescents aged 16-19 offered FB sessions for treatment of CMD who completed at least one FB session. Secondary implementation outcomes included reach, fidelity, and acceptability. The main clinical outcome was the clinical effectiveness of YouFB vs. FB at six months, assessed by changes in Shona Symptom Questionnaire (SSQ-14) scores. We also carried out a cost analysis from a societal perspective. Acceptability was evaluated qualitatively using in-depth interviews. Reach was calculated as the number of adolescents receiving FB sessions per clinic day.
resultsUptake in the FB and YouFB arms was 86.6% (187/216) and 95.6% (220/230), respectively (primary outcome). The number of completed FB sessions (feasibility) was higher in the YouFB arm than the FB arm (cluster-level mean prevalence 96.7% vs. 85.8%, prevalence ratio = 1.13; 95% CI:0.98-1.30). Among 528 trial participants, adjusting for baseline score, gender, education, marital status, employment and HIV status, the proportion of participants with SSQ-14 score ≥ 8 was similar by arm after six months, adjusted odds ratio = 0.65 (95% CI: 0.36-1.17). Total program costs were higher in the YouFB arm. Process evaluation found the YouFB to be highly acceptable.
conclusionsA youth-focused Friendship Bench intervention is feasible and acceptable. Recipients highly valued the ability to connect with a same-age peer and its easy accessibility. However, further intervention optimisation is needed to improve its clinical and cost-effectiveness.
trial registrationThis trial was prospectively registered on 21/08/2018 with the Pan African Clinical Trial Registry database. Registration no PACTR201808181810124.
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.