Cited by 120Posttraumatic Stress Disorder ResearchMental Health Treatment and AccessMigration, Health and Trauma

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 46 of the 47 references it cites were found in a registry or an index, and 1 are not checked yet.

Effectiveness of Group Problem Management Plus, a brief psychological intervention for adults affected by humanitarian disasters in Nepal: A cluster randomized controlled trial

Open access

Abstract

Background: Globally, 235 million people are impacted by humanitarian emergencies worldwide, presenting increased risk of experiencing a mental disorder. Our objective was to test the effectiveness of a brief group psychological treatment delivered by trained facilitators without prior professional mental health training in a disaster-prone setting. Methods and findings: We conducted a cluster randomized controlled trial (cRCT) from November 25, 2018 through September 30, 2019. Participants in both arms were assessed at baseline, midline (7 weeks post-baseline, which was approximately 1 week after treatment in the experimental arm), and endline (20 weeks post-baseline, which was approximately 3 months posttreatment). The intervention was Group Problem Management Plus (PM+), a psychological treatment of 5 weekly sessions, which was compared with enhanced usual care (EUC) consisting of a family psychoeducation meeting with a referral option to primary care providers trained in mental healthcare. The setting was 72 wards (geographic unit of clustering) in eastern Nepal, with 1 PM+ group per ward in the treatment arm. Wards were eligible if they were in disaster-prone regions and residents spoke Nepali. Wards were assigned to study arms based on covariate constrained randomization. Eligible participants were adult women and men 18 years of age and older who met screening criteria for psychological distress and functional impairment. Outcomes were measured at the participant level, with assessors blinded to group assignment. The primary outcome was psychological distress assessed with the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12). Secondary outcomes included depression symptoms, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms, “heart–mind” problems, social support, somatic symptoms, and functional impairment. The hypothesized mediator was skill use aligned with the treatment’s mechanisms of action. A total of 324 participants were enrolled in the control arm (36 wards) and 319 in the Group PM+ arm (36 wards). The overall sample (N= 611) had a median age of 45 years (range 18–91 years), 82% of participants were female, 50% had recently experienced a natural disaster, and 31% had a chronic physical illness. Endline assessments were completed by 302 participants in the control arm (36 wards) and 303 participants in the Group PM+ arm (36 wards). At the midline assessment (immediately after Group PM+ in the experimental arm), mean GHQ-12 total score was 2.7 units lower in Group PM+ compared to control (95% CI: 1.7, 3.7,p< 0.001), with standardized mean difference (SMD) of −0.4 (95% CI: −0.5, −0.2). At 3 months posttreatment (primary endpoint), mean GHQ-12 total score was 1.4 units lower in Group PM+ compared to control (95% CI: 0.3, 2.5,p= 0.014), with SMD of −0.2 (95% CI: −0.4, 0.0). Among the secondary outcomes, Group PM+ was associated with endline with a larger proportion attaining more than 50% reduction in depression symptoms (29.9% of Group PM+ arm versus 17.3% of control arm, risk ratio = 1.7, 95% CI: 1.2, 2.4,p= 0.002). Fewer participants in the Group PM+ arm continued to have “heart–mind” problems at endline (58.8%) compared to the control arm (69.4%), risk ratio = 0.8 (95% CI, 0.7, 1.0,p= 0.042). Group PM+ was not associated with lower PTSD symptoms or functional impairment. Use of psychosocial skills at midline was estimated to explain 31% of the PM+ effect on endline GHQ-12 scores. Adverse events in the control arm included 1 suicide death and 1 reportable incidence of domestic violence; in the Group PM+ arm, there was 1 death due to physical illness. Study limitations include lack of power to evaluate gender-specific effects, lack of long-term outcomes (e.g., 12 months posttreatment), and lack of cost-effectiveness information. Conclusions: In this study, we found that a 5-session group psychological treatment delivered by nonspecialists modestly reduced psychological distress and depression symptoms in a setting prone to humanitarian emergencies. Benefits were partly explained by the degree of psychosocial skill use in daily life. To improve the treatment benefit, future implementation should focus on approaches to enhance skill use by PM+ participants. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.govNCT03747055.

Overview

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 · 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003621

Cites

46 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Fig 1 CONSORT flowchart for Group PM+ cRCT in community settings Morang, Nepal, conducted November 25, 2018 through September 30, 2019. Midline is 7 weeks post-baseline (after completion of the intervention in the Group PM+ arm). Endline is 20 weeks post-baseline (approximately 3 months after completion of the intervention in the Group PM+ arm). Group PM+ consists of 5 weekly group therapy sessions. EUC is a brief (30 minutes) family psychoeducation session and passive referrals to primary care–based mental health services. CONSORT, Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials; cRCT, cluster randomized controlled trial; EUC, enhanced usual care; PM+, Problem Management Plus.
Fig 1 CONSORT flowchart for Group PM+ cRCT in community settings Morang, Nepal, conducted November 25, 2018 through September 30, 2019. Midline is 7 weeks post-baseline (after completion of the intervention in the Group PM+ arm). Endline is 20 weeks post-baseline (approximately 3 months after completion of the intervention in the Group PM+ arm). Group PM+ consists of 5 weekly group therapy sessions. EUC is a brief (30 minutes) family psychoeducation session and passive referrals to primary care–based mental health services. CONSORT, Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials; cRCT, cluster randomized controlled trial; EUC, enhanced usual care; PM+, Problem Management Plus.CC BY · PubMed Central
Fig 2 Intervention effects on primary outcome (GHQ-12) at midline (approximately 1 week after treatment) and endline (approximately 3 months after treatment). GHQ-12, General Health Questionnaire; ITT, intention to treat; PM+, Problem Management Plus.
Fig 2 Intervention effects on primary outcome (GHQ-12) at midline (approximately 1 week after treatment) and endline (approximately 3 months after treatment). GHQ-12, General Health Questionnaire; ITT, intention to treat; PM+, Problem Management Plus.CC BY · PubMed Central
Fig 3 Hypothesized pathway with model-estimated effects for mediation of behavioral and psychosocial skill use at midline on psychological distress at endline. Midline is 7 weeks post-baseline (after completion of the intervention in the Group PM+ arm). Endline is 20 weeks post-baseline (approximately 3 months after completion of the intervention in the Group PM+ arm). GHQ-12, General Health Questionnaire; PM+, Problem Management Plus; RTC, Reducing Tension Checklist.
Fig 3 Hypothesized pathway with model-estimated effects for mediation of behavioral and psychosocial skill use at midline on psychological distress at endline. Midline is 7 weeks post-baseline (after completion of the intervention in the Group PM+ arm). Endline is 20 weeks post-baseline (approximately 3 months after completion of the intervention in the Group PM+ arm). GHQ-12, General Health Questionnaire; PM+, Problem Management Plus; RTC, Reducing Tension Checklist.CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

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.

Citations

Cites

Show all 46 references

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. ZA Stein, 1992, Assessment of people with mental retardation, 12
  2. World Health Organization, 2020, Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO
  3. World Health Organization, 2016, mhGAP intervention guide for mental, neurological and substance use disorders in non-specialized health settings: mental health Gap Action Programme (mhGAP)–version 2.0
  4. NR Koirala, 1999, Validity of the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12) in a Rural Community Setting in Nepal, Nepalese J Psychiatry, 1, 34
  5. B Rothbaum, 2005, The Traumatic Events Inventory Manual
  6. GA Pedersen, 2021, Development of the Group facilitation Assessment of Competencies Tool (GroupACT) for group-based mental health and psychosocial support interventions in humanitarian emergencies and low-resource settings, J Educ Emergencies

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 120

Metadata

Authors
Jordans, M. J. D., Kohrt, B. A., Sangraula, M., Turner, E. L., Wang, X., Shrestha, P., Ghimire, R., van’t Hof, E., Bryant, R. A., Dawson, K. S., Marahatta, K., Luitel, N. P., & van Ommeren, M.
Affiliations
  • King's College London (GB)
  • George Washington University (US)
  • Duke University (US)
  • UNSW Sydney (AU)
  • World Health Organization (CH)
Corresponding author
Kohrt, Brandon A.
Venue
PLOS Medicine
Published
2021-06-17
Volume
18
Issue
6
Pages
e1003621
ISSN
  • 1549-1277 (ISSN-L)
  • 1549-1676
OpenAlex
W3167611877
Cited by
120
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 3
FWCI
12.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Minerva Access (University of Melbourne) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • USAID
  • National Institute of Mental Health (K01MH104310, R01MH120649)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Migration, Health and Trauma
Keywords
group psychological intervention, humanitarian crisis, disaster mental health, psychological distress, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, functional disability, social support, somatic symptoms, community mental health workers, skill utilization, Nepal, natural disasters, mental health treatment gap, family psychoeducation, enhanced usual care, treatment effectiveness
MeSH terms
Natural Disasters, Functional Status, Adaptation, Psychological, Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Depression, Female, Humans, Male, Mental Health, Middle Aged, Nepal, Problem Solving, Psychotherapy, Brief, Psychotherapy, Group, Relief Work, Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic, Stress, Psychological, Time Factors, Treatment Outcome, 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