CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 69Mental Health Treatment and AccessHealth Policy Implementation ScienceDigital Mental Health Interventions

Scaling up psychological treatments for common mental disorders: a call to action

Open access
Singla, Daisy R., Raviola, Giuseppe, Patel, Vikram·2018·World Psychiatry
DOI 10.1002/wps.20532PMC PMC5980618
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Empirically supported psychological treatments – spanning interpersonal, cognitive and behavioural therapies – are recommended as first-line interventions to address the significant burden of depression, anxiety and stress-related disorders worldwide. Nevertheless, they remain inaccessible for the wide majority of the world's population, both in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where less than 5% of people with major depressive disorder receive minimally adequate treatment1, and in high-income countries (HICs), where the corresponding figure reaches only 20%1. This massive treatment gap for such effective treatments is unprecedented in medicine and, as the experience of HICs shows, is not simply a challenge which can be addressed by more mental health care providers. Here we summarize a range of potential strategies through which these treatments might be scaled up to achieve their full potential and reduce the global burden of common mental disorders. Three major barriers prevent delivery of psychological treatments: the lack of skilled providers, limited access, and low demand for mental health care. Each is an obstacle in most countries, but all have viable, evidence-based solutions. If we assume that a "skilled" provider is a health care professional who has been trained in one of the mental health disciplines (social work, psychology or psychiatry), then there is no chance of overcoming the first barrier. There are large gaps between the required and actual numbers of mental health professionals in all countries. Furthermore, the methods typically used to train these specialized persons are expensive, time-intensive and requiring of another, even more experienced specialist to conduct regular supervision for an extended period of time. An effective strategy to address this barrier is "task sharing" or training non-specialist providers – i.e., individuals with no formal training or background in mental health care – to deliver brief, low-intensity psychological treatments. The concept of non-specialist providers originated from para-professional movements in the US and UK. They include nurse practitioners, community health workers, teachers and peers, and are selected because of their availability, low cost, access to and close ties with the population they serve2. Not only can non-specialist providers in LMICs be trained to deliver treatments (and as effectively as specialists in HICs2, 3), but recent evaluations demonstrate that they can ensure high quality of therapy through peer-led supervision4. This, in turn, addresses the bottleneck of the need for supervision provided by mental health specialists. Recent evidence also makes clear that utilizing a core set of common treatment "elements" (such as behavioural activation, exposure, problem solving and communication skills) can reduce the complexity of needing to learn diverse psychological treatment packages for specific clinical phenotypes (such as depressive, anxiety and stress-related disorders). For example, the COBRA trial in the UK demonstrated that non-specialist junior mental health workers with no previous professional training in mental health services successfully delivered a treatment package that focused on the core element of behavioural activation. Results showed equivalent effectiveness in reducing depressive symptom severity as specialists delivering longer courses of cognitive behavioural therapy5. Similarly, in India, lay counsellors trained over 3 months to deliver a culturally adapted version of behavioural activation attained improved remission rates and sustained outcomes in primary care attenders with moderately severe to severe depression6. The second barrier is limited access to psychological treatments. In most countries, psychological treatments are accessible only to a minority of individuals who can afford private treatment or who are supported by generous insurance programs. Furthermore, these provider-centered treatments are typically delivered face-to-face, in urban specialist facilities, and at a time that is most suitable for the provider. In contrast, evidence-based solutions involve the delivery of psychological treatments in settings and at times that are convenient to the patient (for example, at home and during the weekend). In addition, the use of telemedicine and other digital platforms can facilitate this flexibility as well as guided self-care. Delivery of a treatment through a digital platform may be as effective as in-person treatment, but preferred by the recipient and with better sustained outcomes7. Moreover, recent evaluations have demonstrated that therapists can be efficiently trained through digital platforms8. In all contexts, these feasible and cost-effective solutions may be particularly beneficial for individuals with limited financial, social or physical capacity to travel to health facilities, such as mothers with infants, individuals with physical disabilities, or people who are ho

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/wps.20532

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • People without specialist mental health training can deliver psychological interventions effectively, provided they receive sufficient training and supervision.

    “There is now good evidence that persons who are not specialists in mental health can effectively deliver psychological interventions, but they must be adequately trained and supervised 4 .”

    From Ensuring Quality in Psychological Support (WHO EQUIP): developing a competent global workforce (2020) · cites this paper as [4]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 10

  1. Thornicroft G, Chatterji S, Evans-Lacko S et al. Br J Psychiatry 2017;210: 119-24.
  2. Singla DR, Kohrt B, Murray LK et al. Annu Rev Clin Psychol 2017;13:149- 81.
  3. Cuijpers P, Karyotaki E, Reijnders M et al. World Psychiatry 2018;17:90-101.
  4. Singla DR, Weobong B, Nadkarni A et al. Behav Res Ther 2014;60:53-9.
  5. Richards DA, Ekers D, McMillan D, et al. Lancet 2016;388:871-80.
  6. Patel V, Weobong B, Weiss HA et al. Lancet 2017;389:176-85.
  7. Andrews G, Cuijpers P, Craske MG et al. PLoS One 2010;5:e13196.
  8. Fairburn CG, Allen E, Bailey-Straebler S et al. J Med Internet Res 2017; 19:e214.
  9. Hunter A, Riger S. J Community Psychol 1986;14:55-71.
  10. Clark DM, Canvin L, Green J et al. Lancet 2018;391:679-86. DOI:10.1002/wps.20532

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Singla, D. R., Raviola, G., & Patel, V.
Affiliations
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • Boston Children's Hospital (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
ORCID
Venue
World Psychiatry
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2018-05-24
Volume
17
Issue
2
Pages
226-227
ISSN
  • 1723-8617 (ISSN-L)
  • 2051-5545
DOI
10.1002/wps.20532
PMC
PMC5980618
OpenAlex
W2806878544
Cited by
69
References
10
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 1
FWCI
11.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)
Locations
  • World Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
Keywords
common mental disorders, treatment gap, task sharing, non-specialist providers, community health workers, peer supervision, intervention fidelity, brief psychological intervention, mental health workforce shortage, access to mental health care, low- and middle-income countries, depression, anxiety, stress-related disorders, interpersonal psychotherapy, cognitive behavioral therapy, behavioral activation, exposure therapy, problem solving

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review