ArticlePrimary health care research & development2025
Implementation drivers scale: a new implementation measure to reduce mental health gaps.
Article in Primary health care research & development, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Factors driving implementation success of mental health gap action programme (mhGAP) in Colombia: a cross-sectional study.Discover mental health · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThe objectives of this study were to study the psychometric properties of the Implementation Drivers Scale (IDS), for the mhGAP programme, both clinical and community; to test its structural validity, and to propose an instrument to accompany the implementation of the mhGAP in similar contexts. For this purpose, a cross-sectional quantitative methodology study was conducted.
backgroundMental health programmes proposed in low- and middle-income countries to address gaps in care have implementation problems.
methodsA cross-sectional quantitative methodology study was conducted. During 2022 and 2023, the instrument was administered to 204 individuals, including primary care professionals (50%), national administrative leaders (19.11%), and community strategy leaders. Three departments of Colombia participated, two with low levels of implementation in mental health programmes and one with high levels of implementation of programmes and services.
findingsThe Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin factor analysis resulted in 0.861, which indicated the suitability of the data for a factor analysis. Bartlett's Test of Sphericity had a value of 2480.907 (153 degrees of freedom, p <.001). The exploratory factor analysis explained variance of 66.781%. The four factors proposed in the AIF model (System enablers for implementation, Accessibility of the strategy, Adaptability and acceptability, and Strategy training and supervision) were confirmed, with all items with loadings greater than 0.4. For the entire instrument, a Cronbach's alpha was 0.907. The IDS could contribute to the monitoring of some components of mhGAP implementation, both clinical and community-based, in low- and middle-income settings through appropriate validation processes.
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.