Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41074102›Full record

ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2025

Clinical mental health supervision in a humanitarian context in LMICs: PEACE model for community engagement.

Sabiha Jahan, Md Omar Faruk, Gülşah Kurt, Shaun Némorin, Ariel Zarate, Muhammad Kamruzzaman Mozumder, Simon Rosenbaum, Ruth Wells

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Research involvement and engagement, 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. Article
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

8 authors.

Sabiha JahanDepartment of Clinical Psychology, University of Dhaka, Dhaka, Bangladesh. sjreme@gmail.com.
Md Omar FarukDepartment of Clinical Psychology, University of Dhaka, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Gülşah KurtSchool of Psychology, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Shaun NémorinService for the Treatment of Torture and Trauma Survivors, Sydney, Australia.
Ariel ZarateSchool of Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Muhammad Kamruzzaman MozumderDepartment of Clinical Psychology, University of Dhaka, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Simon RosenbaumDiscipline of Psychiatry and Mental Health, School of Clinical Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Ruth WellsSchool of Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.

Funding

Australian Research Council DE240101219Enhancing Learning and Research for Humanitarian Assistance 70177National Health and Medical Research Council RG220311
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Caring for Carers (C4C) project aims to assess the effectiveness and acceptability of an online, group-based supervision program for mental health practitioners working with displaced communities in Bangladesh and in Türkiye and Northwest Syria. This paper highlights the integration of Rohingya perspectives to ensure responsiveness to the unique needs of displaced populations through the supervision program.

methodsAdopting a community-based participatory research (CBPR) approach, the project engaged Rohingya community members in every phase to ensure the program's relevance to local needs. A Rohingya Advisory Committee (RAC) was formed to integrate Rohingya perspectives and conducted in-depth interviews (IDI) and focus group discussions (FGD) with two female MHPSS service users and five male community members, respectively. As recommended by Kiger and Varpio (2020), thematic analysis was employed within a constructivist framework that acknowledged cultural variations in mental health perceptions. The C4C project employed several strategies to engage community members and integrate their perspectives. Stakeholder consultations involved MHPSS service users and community members, the RAC conducted workshops for supervisors, and engaged regularly with the project team providing insights on cultural and practical challenges and collaborating to adapt supervision program materials.

resultsFGD and IDI with service users and community members provided a first glimpse into the community's needs, and experiences, whereas the advisory committee provided lived experiences, meaning of displacement, and ancestral background. The project team invested in a respectful relationship with the advisory committee, working collaboratively to reflect on each other's perspectives through regular meetings and adding content and strategies to the supervision processes. Voices from the community informed the supervision program by elucidating contextual markers, cultural and situational understanding, appreciation, curiosity, experiential information, historical background, and perspectives on mental health needs as well as services.

conclusionsIncorporating strategies and perspectives from the community, we aimed to provide a framework of community engagement termed as PEACE (Participation, Expertise, Agency, Connection, and Empowerment) along with enabling and challenging factors.

Indexed as

Clinical supervisionCommunity engagementCommunity voiceHumanitarian contextsMental health

Identifiers

PMID41074102
PMCPMC12512560

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.