The impact of a lay counselor led collaborative care intervention for common mental disorders in public and private primary care: A qualitative evaluation nested in the MANAS trial in Goa, India
Open accessAbstract
The MANAS trial evaluated the effectiveness of a lay counselor led collaborative stepped care intervention for Common Mental Disorders (CMD) in public and private sector primary care settings in Goa, India. This paper describes the qualitative findings of the experience of the intervention and its impact on health and psychosocial outcomes. Twenty four primary care facilities (12 public and private each) were randomized to provide either collaborative stepped care (CSC) or enhanced usual care (EUC) to adults who screen positive for CMDs. Participants were sampled purposively based on two criteria: gender and, in the CSC arm, adherence with the intervention. The qualitative study component involved two semi-structured interviews with participants of both arms (N = 115); the first interview within 2 months of recruitment and the second 6-8 months after recruitment. Data were collected between September 2007 and November 2009. More participants in the CSC than EUC arm reported relief from symptoms and an improvement in social functioning and positive impact on work and activities of daily life. The CSC participants attributed their improvement both to medication received from the doctors and the strategies suggested by the lay Health Counselors (HC). However, two key differences were observed in the results for the two types of facilities. First, the CSC participants in the public sector clinics were more likely to consider the HCs to be an important component of providing care who served as a link between patient and the doctor, provided them skills on stress management and helped in adherence to medication. Second, in the private sector, doctors performed roles similar to those of the HCs and participants in both arms placed much faith in the doctor who acted as a confidante and was perceived to understand the participant's health and context intimately. Lay counselors working in a CSC model have a positive effect on symptomatic relief, social functioning and satisfaction with care in patients with CMD attending primary care clinics although the impact, compared with usual care, is greater in the public sector.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
Providers with increased self-efficacy were more successful in establishing trust with clients and impacting meaningful change.
“with such providers possessing increased self-efficacy, more successful in establishing trust with clients, and impacting meaningful change [50, 71].”
From Barriers and facilitators to implementation of evidence-based task-sharing mental health interventions in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review using implementation science frameworks (2022) · cites this paper as [50]
The Results (Doctor-patient interaction; page unavailable) link patients’ faith in a physician to positive change, and the Discussion (page unavailable) describes trusting relationships between patients and doctors. The paper does not say that these providers had increased self-efficacy or that self-efficacy made them more successful at building trust or producing change. (LLM, conf=0.85)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 26 · Cited by 37
- Authors
- Shinde, S., Andrew, G., Bangash, O., Cohen, A., Kirkwood, B., & Patel, V.
- Affiliations
- Sangath (IN)
- London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Patel, Vikram
- Venue
- Social Science & Medicine
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2013-07
- Volume
- 88
- Pages
- 48-55
- ISSN
- 0277-9536 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC3675686
- OpenAlex
- W2101491264
- Cited by
- 37
- References
- 26
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 1
- FWCI
- 3.49
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Social Science & Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- LSHTM Research Online (London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine) (acceptedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- The Wellcome Trust DBT India Alliance
- 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 › Clinical Psychology › Psychiatric care and mental health services
- Keywords
- common mental disorders, primary care, public and private health facilities, symptom relief, social functioning, medication adherence, stress management, patient satisfaction, physician-patient relationship, Goa
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Aged, Anxiety Disorders, Cooperative Behavior, Counseling, Depressive Disorder, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, India, Male, Middle Aged, Primary Health Care, Treatment Outcome, Private Sector, Public Sector, Qualitative Research
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