Search

Introduction Promoting mental health, preventing and treating mental disorders are critically important in public health, and many randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluate intervention strategies for these objectives. However, distinguishing promotion from prevention and from treatment RCTs is challenging. A tool to place studies along the promotion-to-treatment continuum in mental health research does not exist, leaving it to researchers and policymakers to decide on how to classify individual RCTs, which hinders evidence synthesis.Methods and analysis We present a protocol for the development of a new tool to assist researchers in distinguishing RCTs along the promotion-to-treatment continuum. We will establish a Tool Development Group, and use the Population, Intervention, Comparison and Outcome framework to define constructs. We will generate, define, categorise and reduce the items in the tool using qualitative methods, including cognitive interviews and a Delphi exercise. Psychometric evaluation—including unidimensionality, local independence, monotonicity and item homogeneity—will include data collection, scoring, internal consistency checks and factor analysis of the tool’s indicators for available RCTs. We will use standard Cohen’s kappa statistics to assess the reliability of the tool.Ethics and dissemination This study involves data collection from the already published literature. However, this protocol has been approved by the ethics committee of the Università della Svizzera Italiana (CE 2024 04). The results of the present project will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and at international and national scientific meetings. Training materials for the application of the tool will also be developed and disseminated to the scientific community. The tool and all related implementation materials will be published on a website and will be freely accessible to the public.

Introduction Common mental health conditions (CMHCs), including depression, anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), are highly prevalent in low and middle-income countries (LMICs). Preventive strategies combining psychological interventions with interventions addressing the social determinants of mental health may represent a key strategy for effectively preventing CMHCs. However, no systematic reviews have evaluated the effectiveness of these combined intervention strategies for preventing CMHCs.Methods and analysis This systematic review will include randomised controlled trials (RCTs) focused on the effectiveness of interventions that combine preventive psychological interventions with interventions that address the social determinants of mental health in LMICs. Primary outcome is the frequency of depression, anxiety or PTSD at postintervention as determined by a formal diagnostic tool or any other standardised criteria. We will search Epistemonikos, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Global Index Medicus, ClinicalTrials.gov (Ctgov), International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). Two reviewers will independently extract the data and evaluate the risk of bias of included studies using the Cochrane risk of bias tool 2. Random-effects meta-analyses will be performed, and certainty of evidence will be rated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.Ethics and dissemination This study uses data from published studies; therefore, ethical review is not required. Findings will be presented in a published manuscript.Trial registration number CRD42023451072

Introduction Scalable psychological treatments to address depression among adolescents are urgently needed. This is particularly relevant to low-income and middle-income countries where 90% of the world’s adolescents live. While digital delivery of behavioural activation (BA) presents a promising solution, its feasibility, acceptability and effectiveness among adolescents in an African context remain to be shown.Methods and analysis This study is a two-arm single-blind individual-level randomised controlled pilot trial to assess the feasibility, acceptability and initial efficacy of digitally delivered BA therapy among adolescents with depression. The intervention has been coproduced with adolescents at the study site. The study is based in the rural northeast of South Africa in the Bushbuckridge subdistrict of Mpumalanga province. A total of 200 adolescents with symptoms of mild to moderately severe depression on the Patient Health Questionnaire Adolescent Version will be recruited (1:1 allocation ratio). The treatment group will receive BA therapy via a smartphone application (the Kuamsha app) supported by trained peer mentors. The control group will receive an enhanced standard of care. The feasibility and acceptability of the intervention will be evaluated using a mixed methods design, and signals of the initial efficacy of the intervention in reducing symptoms of depression will be determined on an intention-to-treat basis. Secondary objectives are to pilot a range of cognitive, mental health, risky behaviour and socioeconomic measures; and to collect descriptive data on the feasibility of trial procedures to inform the development of a further larger trial.Ethics and dissemination This study has been approved by the University of the Witwatersrand Human Research Ethics Committee (MED20-05-011) and the Oxford Tropical Research Ethics Committee (OxTREC 34-20). Study findings will be published in scientific open access peer-reviewed journals, presented at scientific conferences and communicated to participants, their caregivers, public sector officials and other relevant stakeholders.Trial registration numbers This trial was registered on 19 November 2020 with the South African National Clinical Trials Registry (DOH-27-112020-5741) and the Pan African Clinical Trials Registry (PACTR202206574814636).

Objectives ASSET (Health System Strengthening in sub-Saharan Africa) is a health system strengthening (HSS) programme involving eight work-packages (ie, a research study that addresses a specific need for HSS) that aims to develop solutions that support high-quality care. Here we present the protocol for the implementation science (IS) theme within ASSET (ASSET-ImplmentER) that aims to understand what HSS interventions work, for whom and how, and how IS methodologies can be adapted to improve the HSS interventions within resource-poor contexts.Settings Publicly funded health facilities in rural and urban areas in in Ethiopia, South Africa, Sierra Leone, and Zimbabwe.Participants Research staff including principal investigators, coinvestigators, field staff, PhD students, and research assistants.Interventions Work-packages use a mixed-methods effectiveness–effectiveness hybrid designs. At the end of the pre-implementation phase, a workshop is held whereby the IS theme, jointly with ASSET work-packages apply IS determinant frameworks to research findings to identify factors that influence the effectiveness of delivering evidence-informed care. Determinants are used to select a set of HSS interventions for further evaluation, where work-packages also theorise selective mechanisms.In the piloting and rolling implementation phase, work-packages pilot the HSS interventions. An iterative process then begins involving evaluation, reflection and adaptation. Throughout this phase, IS determinant frameworks are applied to monitor and identify barriers/enablers to implementation. Selective mechanisms of action are also investigated. Implementation outcomes are evaluated using qualitative and quantitative methods. The psychometric properties of outcome measures including acceptability, appropriateness and feasibility are also evaluated. In a final workshop, work-packages come together, to reflect and explore the utility of the selected IS methods and provide suggestions for future use.Structured templates are used to organise and analyse common and heterogeneous patterns across work-packages. Qualitative data are analysed using thematic analysis and quantitative data are analysed using means and proportions.Conclusions We use a novel combination of IS methods at a programmatic level to facilitate comparisons of determinants and mechanisms that influence the effectiveness of HSS interventions in achieving implementation outcomes across different contexts. The study also contributes conceptual development and clarification at the underdeveloped interface of IS, HSS and global health.The ASSET-ImplementER theme is considered minimal risk as we only interview researchers involved in the different work-packages. To this effect we have received approval from King’s College London Ethics Committee for research that is considered minimal risk (Reference number: MRA-20/21-21772).