Cited by 93Digital Mental Health InterventionsMental Health Treatment and AccessCultural Competency in Health Care

The Cultural Adaptation of Step-by-Step: An Intervention to Address Depression Among Chinese Young Adults

Open access
Sit, Hao Fong, Ling, Rui, Lam, Agnes Iok Fong, Chen, Wen, Latkin, Carl A., Hall, Brian J.·2020·Frontiers in Psychiatry

Abstract

Background: Digital mental health interventions leverage digital communication technology to address the mental health needs of populations. Culturally adapting interventions can lead to a successful, scalable mental health intervention implementation, and cultural adaptation of digital mental health interventions is a critical component to implementing interventions at scale within contexts where mental health services are not well supported. Objective: The study aims to describe the cultural adaptation of a digital mental health intervention Step-by-Step in order to address depression among Chinese young adults. Methods: Cultural adaptation was carried out in four phases following Ecological Validity Model: 1) Stage setting and expert consultation; 2) Preliminary content adaptation; 3) Iterative content adaptation with community members; 4) Finalized adaptation with community feedback meetings. Cognitive interviewing was applied to probe for relevance, acceptability, comprehensibility, and completeness of illustrations and text. Six mental health experts and 34 Chinese young adults were recruited for key informant interviews and focus group discussions. Results: We adapted the text and illustrations to fits the culture among Chinese young adults. Eight elements of the intervention were chosen as the targets of cultural adaptation (e.g., language, metaphors, content). Samples of major adaptations included: adding scenarios related to university life (relevance), changing leading characters from a physician to a peer and a cartoon (acceptability), incorporating two language versions (traditional Chinese and simplified Chinese) in the intervention (comprehensibility), and maintaining fundamental therapeutic components (completeness). Conclusion: This study showed the utility of using the ​Ecological Validity Model and a four-point procedure framework for cultural adaptation and achieved a culturally appropriate version of the Step-by-Step program for Chinese young adults.

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 · 10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00650

Cites

47 of 47 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?

  • Additional adaptations of SbS have been tested with Albanian, Chinese, and Filipino populations.

    “Additional adaptations of SbS have been tested with Albanian [34], Chinese [35], and Filipino [36] populations.”

    From Effects of a self-guided digital mental health self-help intervention for Syrian refugees in Egypt: A pragmatic randomized controlled trial (2024) · cites this paper as [35]

    The Discussion and Conclusion report that SbS was culturally adapted for Chinese young adults, and the Methods describe Chinese participants reviewing its materials in focus groups. But the Discussion says a feasibility study and effectiveness trial were still planned, so the source does not establish that the adapted intervention had been tested with the target population. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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. [31]Manson SM Cross-cultural and multiethnic assessment of trauma. Assessing psychological trauma and PTSD. New York, NY, US: Guilford Press; (1997) p. 239–66.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sit, H. F., Ling, R., Lam, A. I. F., Chen, W., Latkin, C. A., & Hall, B. J.
Affiliations
  • University of Macau (MO)
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
  • Sun Yat-sen University (CN)
Corresponding author
Hall, Brian J.
Venue
Frontiers in Psychiatry
Published
2020-07-07
Volume
11
Pages
650-650
ISSN
1664-0640 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3039383824
Cited by
93
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 3
FWCI
5.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Psychiatry (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • World Health Organization
  • Johns Hopkins University
  • Universidade de Macau (MYRG2018)
  • Peking University
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Cultural Competency in Health Care
Keywords
cultural adaptation, digital mental health interventions, depression, young adults, Chinese young adults, Ecological Validity Model, cognitive interviewing, peer support, language adaptation, college student life, acceptability

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