↓ Skip to main content

Task shifting interpersonal counseling for depression: a pragmatic randomized controlled trial in primary care

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Psychiatry, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
250 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Task shifting interpersonal counseling for depression: a pragmatic randomized controlled trial in primary care
Published in
BMC Psychiatry, June 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12888-017-1379-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Camila T. Matsuzaka, Milton Wainberg, Andrea Norcini Pala, Elis V. Hoffmann, Bruno M. Coimbra, Rosaly F. Braga, Annika C. Sweetland, Marcelo F. Mello

Abstract

Task shifting approaches (rational redistribution of tasks among health workforce teams) to train lay professionals to assist with integrating mental health treatment in primary care has been recommended to close the mental health treatment gap for depression in low- and middle-income countries. This study aims to examine the a new model for depression care in a low-resource environment compared to enhanced treatment at usual (E-TAU). We trained non-specialist community health workers (local lay employees of the public health system) to provide Interpersonal Counseling (IPC) to treat depressive symptoms in the Brazilian, São Paulo city, family health strategy (FHS). We conducted a randomized controlled trial involving 86 patients with a current major depressive disorder or dysthymia (based on DSM-IV) recruited from an FHS clinic. Participants were randomized to IPC intervention (n = 43) or E-TAU (n = 43). Participants allocated to IPC received 3-4 sessions provided by community health workers; research psychologists followed the E-TAU participants to facilitate their referral to specialized mental health care within the public system. Reduction of depressive symptoms was assessed using the Hamilton Rating Scale (HDRS-17) and the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9); minor psychiatric symptomatology (including depression, anxiety and somatoform symptoms) were measured using the Self Reporting Questionnaire (SRQ); and functioning was measured by the Clinical Global Impression Scale over a 2-month period. Intention-to-treat analysis showed significant improvement on symptoms for both groups over 2 months, without significant differences between them. Per-protocol analysis showed significant better HDRS-17 outcomes for the IPC group. Training non-specialist community health workers in low- and middle-income countries to provide IPC could be a successful strategy in reducing the burden of depression and also potentially a low-cost and effective alternative to specialist-led services that might not be possible in low income settings. Brazilian Clinical Trials, number RBR-5qhmb5 (trial url: http://www.ensaiosclinicos.gov.br/rg/RBR-5qhmb5/) , retrospectively registered after May 1, 2013.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 250 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 250 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 40 16%
Researcher 26 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 22 9%
Student > Bachelor 18 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 6%
Other 49 20%
Unknown 80 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 49 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 37 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 30 12%
Social Sciences 13 5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4 2%
Other 19 8%
Unknown 98 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 June 2017.
All research outputs
#19,292,491
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychiatry
#4,109
of 4,939 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#245,399
of 318,785 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychiatry
#94
of 116 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,939 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.9. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 318,785 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 116 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.