Cited by 89Mental Health Treatment and AccessSuicide and Self-Harm StudiesPsychiatric care and mental health services

The effect of VISHRAM, a grass-roots community-based mental health programme, on the treatment gap for depression in rural communities in India: a population-based study

Shidhaye, Rahul, Murhar, Vaibhav, Gangale, Siddharth, Aldridge, Luke, Shastri, Rahul, Parikh, Rachana, Shrivastava, Ritu, Damle, Suvarna +3 more·2017·The Lancet Psychiatry

Abstract

Background VISHRAM was a community-based mental health programme with the goal of addressing the mental health risk factors for suicide in people from 30 villages in the Amravati district in Vidarbha, central India. We aimed to assess whether implementation of VISHRAM was associated with an increase in the proportion of people with depression who sought treatment (contact coverage).Methods A core strategy of VISHRAM was to increase the demand for care by enhancing mental health literacy and to improve the supply of evidence-based interventions for depression and alcohol-use disorders. Intervention for depression was led by community-based workers and non-specialist counsellors and done in collaboration with facility-based general physicians and psychiatrists. From Dec 25, 2013, to March 10, 2014, before VISHRAM was introduced, we did a baseline cross-sectional survey of adults randomly selected from the electoral roll (baseline survey population). The structured interview was administered by field researchers independent of the VISHRAM intervention and included questions about sociodemographic characteristics, health-care service use, depression (measured using the Patient Health Questionnaire [PHQ]-9), and mental health literacy. 18 months after VISHRAM was enacted, we repeated sampling methods to select a separate population of adults (18 month survey population) and administered the same survey. The primary outcome was change in contact coverage with VISHRAM, defined as the difference in the proportion of individuals with depression (PHQ-9 score >9) who sought treatment for symptoms of depression between the baseline and the 18 month survey population. Secondary outcomes were whether the distribution of coverage was equitable, the type of services sought, and mental health literacy.Findings 1887 participants completed the 18 month survey interview between Sept 18, and Oct 8, 2015. The contact coverage for current depression was six-times higher in the 18 month survey population (27·2%, 95% CI 21·4-33·7) than in the baseline survey population (4·3%, 1·5-7·1). Contact coverage was equitably distributed across sex, education, income, religion, and caste. Most providers consulted for care were general physicians. We observed significant improvements in a range of mental health literacy indicators, for example, conceptualisation of depression as a mental health problem and the intention to seek care for depression.Interpretation A grass-roots community-based programme in rural India was associated with substantial increase in equitable contact coverage for depression and improved mental health literacy. It is now crucially important to translate this knowledge into real-world practice by scaling-up this programme through the National Mental Health Programme in India.Funding Tata Trusts.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s2215-0366(16)30424-2

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Shidhaye, R., Murhar, V., Gangale, S., Aldridge, L., Shastri, R., Parikh, R., Shrivastava, R., Damle, S., Raja, T., Nadkarni, A., & Patel, V.
Affiliations
  • Maastricht University (NL)
  • Sangath (IN)
  • Global Health Corps (US)
  • Public Health Foundation of India (IN)
  • Tata Trusts (IN)
  • London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (GB)
Corresponding author
Patel, Vikram
Venue
The Lancet Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-02
Volume
4
Issue
2
Pages
128-135
ISSN
2215-0366 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2569731065
Cited by
89
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 5
FWCI
12.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Lancet Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Publications (Maastricht University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Vanderbilt University
  • Wellcome Trust
  • Tata Trusts
  • Fogarty International Center
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychiatric care and mental health services
Keywords
depression, treatment gap, mental health literacy, rural mental health, suicide prevention, alcoholism, health care utilization, India, general practitioners, PHQ-9, community health workers
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Community Mental Health Services, Cross-Sectional Studies, Depressive Disorder, Female, Health Services Accessibility, Humans, India, Male, Middle Aged, Surveys and Questionnaires, Rural Population, Program Evaluation, Poisson Distribution, Young Adult

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