ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2026
Competency-based training and supervision in group problem management plus in the Kurdistan region of Iraq.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Group Problem Management Plus (gPM+) is a scalable psychological intervention designed to be delivered by non-specialist mental health workers and has been widely implemented in humanitarian contexts. As part of the ongoing process of integrating refugees into routine national care systems, competency-based training and supervision were implemented in Duhok, within the Kurdistan Region of Iraq. Twelve participants from the Directorate General of Health (DoH), working in Syrian refugee camps, took part in a seven-day training programme, followed by supportive supervision over a six-month period. The programme aimed to enhance participants' skills in delivering the group intervention to individuals experiencing psychological distress. Methods: The training programme consisted of a seven-day (56 hours), structured in-person course combining theoretical input, demonstration, and intensive role-play practice, followed by a six-month supervision (30 hours) phase that included regular group supervision sessions and individual on-site coaching focused on real-life implementation challenges. Individual and group-level competency improvements were assessed using the EQUIP (Ensuring Quality in Psychosocial Support and Mental Health Care) methodology, which provides a structured approach to monitoring and tracking participants' progress in facilitation and intervention skills, enabling trainers to identify skill gaps and tailor supervision sessions effectively. This was supplemented by qualitative evaluations from both participants and trainers. Results: Participants showed notable reductions in harmful behaviours and improvements in competencies. Supervision sessions and role-playing exercises further reinforced learning and skill application. Participants also reported increased confidence, with feedback highlighting the value of problem-solving strategies and coping techniques. Conclusions: EQUIP proved effective in monitoring and guiding improvements among non-specialist staff delivering psychological interventions. The EQUIP platform may serve as a valuable tool for strengthening mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS) training and interventions, and for facilitating the integration of programmes developed in humanitarian contexts into routine systems of care in low-resource settings.
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.