Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40887580›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2025

Co-prioritization of mental health recovery outcomes and scales for community mental health centers in Peru.

Victoria Cavero, Francisco Diez-Canseco, Antonio Bernabé-Ortiz, Lisette Gamboa Galvez, Noelia Cusihuaman-Lope, Marcia Sanchez-Monge, Maria Lazo-Porras

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Victoria CaveroCRONICAS Center of Excellence in Chronic Diseases, Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia, Lima, Peru.
Francisco Diez-CansecoCRONICAS Center of Excellence in Chronic Diseases, Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia, Lima, Peru. fdiezcanseco@upch.pe.
Antonio Bernabé-OrtizCRONICAS Center of Excellence in Chronic Diseases, Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia, Lima, Peru.
Lisette Gamboa GalvezCRONICAS Center of Excellence in Chronic Diseases, Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia, Lima, Peru.
Noelia Cusihuaman-LopeCRONICAS Center of Excellence in Chronic Diseases, Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia, Lima, Peru.
Marcia Sanchez-MongeCRONICAS Center of Excellence in Chronic Diseases, Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia, Lima, Peru.
Maria Lazo-PorrasCRONICAS Center of Excellence in Chronic Diseases, Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia, Lima, Peru.

Funding

Economic and Social Research Council MR/V014919/1Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office MR/V014919/1Medical Research Council MR/V014919/1Wellcome MR/V014919/1Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMental health recovery outcomes are scarcely used and monitored in low- and middle-income countries, despite their importance on assessing the results of the care provided and potential areas of improvements. In Peru, the Mental Health Directorate (MHD) monitors mental health services mainly based on the number of people served and not on the improvements or recovery of their patients. This study aims to conduct a co-prioritization process with key stakeholders to introduce recovery outcomes and scales in community mental health centers (CMHC) in Peru.

methodsThe co-prioritization methodology combined periodic meetings with MHD's heads; a literature search and conversations with nine international mental health experts; and eight participatory workshops with Peruvian key stakeholders (policymakers, CMHC workers, and patients). All the information was analyzed using matrices and thematic analysis.

resultsNine outcomes were identified in the literature search and conversations with mental health experts, and five outcomes were finally prioritized by key stakeholders. After revision and discussion of several scales for each outcome, two scales were prioritized by all stakeholders: WHODAS-12 and DIALOG. Policymakers, workers, and patients prioritized three of these outcomes: psychosocial functioning, quality of life, and psychiatric symptoms. The first two were the most important for the three groups, whereas symptoms were more important for policymakers and workers than for patients. Additionally, patients prioritized emotional balance and personal growth, two emerging outcomes that were not identified in our previous literature search and conversations with experts. Scales were prioritized based on their relevance, usability, and feasibility to integrate them into the CMHC routines: WHODAS-12 to assess psychosocial functioning and DIALOG for quality of life. Stakeholders did not agree on a single scale to assess symptoms due to the large array of symptoms that their patients present, and no scale was assessed for emotional balance and personal growth since they only emerged in the final set of workshops.

conclusionBased on a participatory methodology, key stakeholders at different levels of the Peruvian mental health system prioritized five recovery outcomes to use routinely in CMHC: psychosocial functioning, quality of life, psychiatric symptoms, emotional balance, and personal growth. The first two were deemed as the most important for all stakeholders; and the latter two were novel outcomes that emerged from patients. Two scales were selected to assess the first two of these outcomes. Defining a scale for the latter three outcomes and test their use in CMHC routines remain as pending tasks.

Indexed as

Community Mental Health CentersCommunity Mental Health ServicesHealth PrioritiesMental DisordersMental Health RecoveryOutcome Assessment, Health CareHumansPeruQuality of LifeCommunity mental health centersCo-prioritizationHealth servicesMental healthOutcome assessmentParticipatory research

Identifiers

PMID40887580
PMCPMC12400696

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.