Cited by 89Mental Health Treatment and AccessSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications

Effectiveness of psychological treatments for depression and alcohol use disorder delivered by community-based counsellors: two pragmatic randomised controlled trials within primary healthcare in Nepal

Open access
Jordans, Mark J. D., Luitel, Nagendra P., Garman, Emily, Kohrt, Brandon A., Rathod, Sujit D., Shrestha, Pragya, Komproe, Ivan H., Lund, Crick +1 more·2019·British Journal of Psychiatry

Abstract

Background: Evidence shows benefits of psychological treatments in low-resource countries, yet few government health systems include psychological services. Aim: Evaluating the clinical value of adding psychological treatments, delivered by community-based counsellors, to primary care-based mental health services for depression and alcohol use disorder (AUD), as recommended by the Mental Health Gap Action Programme (mhGAP). Method: Two randomised controlled trials, separately for depression and AUD, were carried out. Participants were randomly allocated (1:1) to mental healthcare delivered by mhGAP-trained primary care workers (psychoeducation and psychotropic medicines when indicated), or the same services plus individual psychological treatments (Healthy Activity Program for depression and Counselling for Alcohol Problems). Primary outcomes were symptom severity, measured using the Patient Health Questionnaire – 9 item (PHQ-9) for depression and the Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test for AUD, and functional impairment, measured using the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS), at 12 months post-enrolment. Results: Participants with depression in the intervention arm (n = 60) had greater reduction in PHQ-9 and WHODAS scores compared with participants in the control (n = 60) (PHQ-9: M = −5.90, 95% CI −7.55 to −4.25, β = −3.68, 95% CI −5.68 to −1.67, P < 0.001, Cohen's d = 0.66; WHODAS: M = −12.21, 95% CI −19.58 to −4.84, β = −10.74, 95% CI −19.96 to −1.53, P= 0.022, Cohen's d = 0.42). For the AUD trial, no significant effect was found when comparing control (n = 80) and intervention participants (n = 82). Conclusion: Adding a psychological treatment delivered by community-based counsellors increases treatment effects for depression compared with only mhGAP-based services by primary health workers 12 months post-treatment. Declaration of interest: None.

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 · 10.1192/bjp.2018.300

Cites

36 of 36 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?

  • For Jordans 2019, blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) for all outcomes was judged high risk.

    “Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes High risk”

    From Psychosocial and pharmacologic interventions to reduce harmful alcohol use in low- and middle-income countries (2023) · cites this paper as Jordans 2019

    The Methods (Procedures; page not available) state that research assessors were blinded to participants’ study-arm assignments. The paper says participants could not be blinded, but that is distinct from blinding of outcome assessors and does not support the stated high-risk assessment for detection bias. (LLM, conf=0.89)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Motivational interviewing and/or cognitive behavioral therapy showed a lower likelihood of retention relative to usual care.

    “Individual studies varied between displaying a greater likelihood of retention in home visits and psychotherapy relative to psychotherapy alone (Moraes 2010), but lower likelihood of retention in motivational interviewing and/or cognitive behavioral therapy relative to usual care (Jordans 2019; Papas 2011).”

    From Psychosocial and pharmacologic interventions to reduce harmful alcohol use in low- and middle-income countries (2023) · cites this paper as Jordans 2019

    The Results (Sample characteristics; page unavailable) report more loss to follow-up in the depression intervention arm than in usual care (23.3% versus 15.0%), consistent with lower retention there. In the alcohol-use-disorder trial, loss to follow-up was slightly lower in the intervention arm (17.5% versus 19.5%), and the Discussion says attrition was not disproportionate across arms. The claim therefore overgeneralizes the retention pattern across the two trials. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • For Jordans 2019, blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) for all outcomes was judged high risk.

    “Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes High risk”

    From Psychosocial and pharmacologic interventions to reduce harmful alcohol use in low- and middle-income countries (2023) · cites this paper as Jordans 2019

    The Methods (Procedures; page not available) state that participants could not be blinded, while research assessors were blinded. The Methods (Randomization; page not available) describe counsellors being connected to participants assigned to treatment. The paper does not itself report a high-risk performance-bias judgment for all outcomes. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • For Jordans 2019, incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) for all outcomes was judged low risk.

    “Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes Low risk”

    From Psychosocial and pharmacologic interventions to reduce harmful alcohol use in low- and middle-income countries (2023) · cites this paper as Jordans 2019

    The Methods (Statistical analyses; page unavailable) say all outcome analyses used intention-to-treat and multiple imputation for missing data, and the Results (Outcomes AUD trial; page unavailable) report similar findings in available-data sensitivity analyses. These details support the citing authors’ low-risk assessment, but the paper does not itself assign a low attrition-bias rating; the Results (Sample characteristics; page unavailable) also report losses to follow-up of 15.0%–23.3% in the depression trial and 17.5%–19.5% in the AUD trial. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Twelve included psychosocial treatment trials with 2106 participants reported on harmful alcohol use; all reported harmful alcohol use on a continuous scale.

    “Twelve included psychosocial treatment trials with 2106 participants reported on harmful alcohol use. All of these trials reported harmful alcohol use on a continuous scale (Bolton 2014; Jordans 2019; Kane 2022; Madhombiro 2019; Madhombiro 2020; Moraes 2010; Murray 2020; Nadkarni 2017; Nadkarni 2019; Omeje 2018; Schaub 2021; Witte 2011).”

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: 1

  1. [8]WHO. mhGAP Intervention Guide for mental, neurological and substance use disorders in non-specialized health settings (version 2.0). Geneva: World Health Organization, 2016. 27786430

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jordans, M. J. D., Luitel, N. P., Garman, E., Kohrt, B. A., Rathod, S. D., Shrestha, P., Komproe, I. H., Lund, C., & Patel, V.
Affiliations
  • King's College London (GB)
  • University of Cape Town (ZA)
  • George Washington University (US)
  • London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (GB)
  • Utrecht University (NL)
  • Harvard University (US)
Corresponding author
Jordans, Mark J. D.
Venue
British Journal of Psychiatry
Published
2019-01-25
Volume
215
Issue
2
Pages
485-493
ISSN
  • 0007-1250 (ISSN-L)
  • 1472-1465
OpenAlex
W2912839368
Cited by
89
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 1
FWCI
15.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The British Journal of Psychiatry (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • LSHTM Research Online (London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine) (acceptedVersion)
  • Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Mental Health (K01MH104310)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Keywords
depression, alcoholism, primary care, Mental Health Gap Action Programme, psychological intervention, resource-limited settings, Nepal, functional disability, symptom severity
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Alcoholism, Community Mental Health Services, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Counseling, Depression, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Nepal, Primary Health Care, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Remission Induction, Severity of Illness Index, Logistic Models, 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