Cited by 19Mental Health Treatment and AccessHealth Policy Implementation ScienceInnovations in Medical Education

“We find what we look for, and we look for what we know”: factors interacting with a mental health training program to influence its expected outcomes in Tunisia

Open access
Spagnolo, Jessica, Champagne, François, Leduc, Nicole, Melki, Wahid, Piat, Myra, Laporta, Marc, Bram, Nesrine, Guesmi, Imen +1 more·2018·BMC Public Health

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Primary care physicians (PCPs) working in mental health care in Tunisia often lack knowledge and skills needed to adequately address mental health-related issues. To address these lacunas, a training based on the Mental Health Gap Action Programme (mhGAP) Intervention Guide (IG) was offered to PCPs working in the Greater Tunis area between February and April 2016. While the mhGAP-IG has been used extensively in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) to help build non-specialists' mental health capacity, little research has focused on how contextual factors interact with the implemented training program to influence its expected outcomes. This paper's objective is to fill that lack. METHODS: We conducted a case study with a purposeful sample of 18 trained PCPs. Data was collected by semi-structured interviews between March and April 2016. Qualitative data was analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Participants identified more barriers than facilitators when describing contextual factors influencing the mhGAP-based training's expected outcomes. Barriers were regrouped into five categories: structural factors (e.g., policies, social context, local workforce development, and physical aspects of the environment), organizational factors (e.g., logistical issues for the provision of care and collaboration within and across healthcare organizations), provider factors (e.g., previous mental health experience and personal characteristics), patient factors (e.g., beliefs about the health system and healthcare professionals, and motivation to seek care), and innovation factors (e.g., training characteristics). These contextual factors interacted with the implemented training to influence knowledge about pharmacological treatments and symptoms of mental illness, confidence in providing treatment, negative beliefs about certain mental health conditions, and the understanding of the role of PCPs in mental health care delivery. In addition, post-training, participants still felt uncomfortable with certain aspects of treatment and the management of some mental health conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Findings highlight the complexity of implementing a mhGAP-based training given its interaction with contextual factors to influence the attainment of expected outcomes. Results may be used to tailor structural, organizational, provider, patient, and innovation factors prior to future implementations of the mhGAP-based training in Tunisia. Findings may also be used by decision-makers interested in implementing the mhGAP-IG training in other LMICs.

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 · 10.1186/s12889-018-6261-4

Cites

66 of 66 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?

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: 4

  1. [16]World Health Organization 2017 Mental health atlas 2018 Geneva WHO Press
  2. [23]mhGAP Intervention Guide for mental Neurological and substance use disorders in non-specialized health settings (version 1.0) 2010 Geneva World Health Organization 23741783
  3. [25]mhGAP Intervention Guide for mental Neurological and substance use disorders in non-specialized health settings (version 2.0) 2016 Geneva World Health Organization 27786430
  4. [28]Bruni A Assessing the efficacy of the Mental health gap action Programme (mhGAP) training for non-specialized health workers in Ethiopia: Master’s dissertation 2014

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Spagnolo, J., Champagne, F., Leduc, N., Melki, W., Piat, M., Laporta, M., Bram, N., Guesmi, I., & Charfi, F.
Affiliations
  • Université de Montréal (CA)
  • Tunis University (TN)
  • Douglas Mental Health University Institute (CA)
  • McGill University (CA)
  • Manouba University (TN)
  • Tunis El Manar University (TN)
Corresponding author
Spagnolo, Jessica
Venue
BMC Public Health
Published
2018-12
Volume
18
Issue
1
Pages
1398-1398
ISSN
1471-2458 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2904201987
Cited by
19
References
66
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3
FWCI
3.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMC Public Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Fonds de Recherche du Québec - Santé (33774)
  • Mitacs (IT06835)
  • Institut de recherche en santé publique de l'Université de Montréal
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
Keywords
Mental Health Gap Action Programme, primary care physicians, mental health training, contextual factors, barriers and facilitators, implementation outcomes, non-specialist mental health care, mental health knowledge, treatment confidence, Tunisia, low- and middle-income countries
MeSH terms
Mental Disorders, Clinical Competence, Female, Humans, Inservice Training, Male, Mental Health, Middle Aged, Tunisia, Program Evaluation, Treatment Outcome, Organizational Case Studies, Qualitative Research, Physicians, Primary Care

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