Cited by 19Intimate Partner and Family ViolenceCommunity Health and DevelopmentMigration, Health and Trauma

Proyecto Interconexiones : A Pilot Test of a Community-Based Depression Care Program for Latina Violence Survivors

Open access
Nicolaidis, Christina, Mejia, Angie, Perez, Marlen, Alvarado, Anabertha, Celaya-Alston, Rosemary, Quintero, Yolanda, Aguillon, Raquel·2013·Progress in Community Health Partnerships: Research, Education, and Action

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Latina intimate partner violence (IPV) survivors often face great barriers to depression care. We sought to use a community-based participatory research (CBPR) approach to create and evaluate a community-based depression care program for Latina IPV survivors. METHODS: We created a multifaceted, culturally tailored intervention, based on principles of chronic illness management. A promotora provided case management services and led 12 weekly group sessions. Participants completed surveys at baseline and 6 months and participated in open-ended exit interviews. RESULTS: Ten Spanish-speaking Latina women participated in the intervention. The program had excellent attendance, with 100% of women attending at least 10 group sessions, and high satisfaction. We found a large decrease in depression severity (Patient Health Questionnaire [PHQ]-9, 17.3-7.2; p = .001), as well as improvements in depression self-efficacy, self-esteem, and stress. CONCLUSION: This study offers promising preliminary data to support the use of community-based approaches to reducing depression disparities in Latina IPV survivors.

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 · 10.1353/cpr.2013.0051

Cites

27 of 27 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?

  • The three studies by Kelly et al., McWhirter et al., and Nicolaidis et al. reported significant reductions in severity of depression and PTSD, as well as an increase in social support and self-efficacy for the women involved.

    “These studies reported significant reductions in severity of mental health conditions like depression and PTSD, as well as an increase in social support and self-efficacy for the women who were involved in the study.”

    From A systematic review of intimate partner violence interventions focused on improving social support and/ mental health outcomes of survivors (2020) · cites this paper as [38]

    The Results (Health and Healthcare Outcomes; page not provided) report a significant reduction in depression severity and a significant increase in depression self-efficacy among participants. This paper does not report a reduction in PTSD severity or an increase in social support. Its Discussion also cautions that the uncontrolled pilot cannot establish whether the intervention caused the observed changes. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Nine of the reviewed studies (3 RCTs, 3 pre-post evaluations, 3 qualitative research) consisted of community-based interventions.

    “9 (3 RCTs, 3 pre-post evaluations, 3 qualitative research) of the studies we reviewed consisted of interventions described as being community-based [34–42].”

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. [24]Straus MA Hamby SI Boney-McCoy S Sugarman D The revised Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS2) Journal of Family Issues 1996 17 283 316

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Nicolaidis, C., Mejia, A., Perez, M., Alvarado, A., Celaya-Alston, R., Quintero, Y., & Aguillon, R.
Affiliations
  • Oregon Health & Science University (US)
  • Portland State University (US)
Venue
Progress in Community Health Partnerships: Research, Education, and Action
Publisher
Project MUSE
Published
2013-12
Volume
7
Issue
4
Pages
395-401
ISSN
  • 1557-0541 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-055X
OpenAlex
W2098896892
Cited by
19
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2
FWCI
1.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Progress in community health partnerships (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • PDXScholar (Portland State University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Northwest Health Foundation
  • Kaiser Permanente
  • National Institute of Mental Health (K23MH073008)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Intimate Partner and Family Violence
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Community Health and Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Migration, Health and Trauma
Keywords
Hispanic women, intimate partner violence, depression care, promotoras, case management, culturally tailored interventions, chronic disease management, self-esteem, stress, Spanish-speaking women, group intervention
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Depression, Female, Hispanic or Latino, Humans, Interviews as Topic, Middle Aged, Pilot Projects, Surveys and Questionnaires, Self Concept, Stress, Psychological, Program Development, Patient Satisfaction, Domestic Violence, Survivors, Self Efficacy, Community-Based Participatory 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