Review: Digital supervision of non-specialist providers delivering psychosocial interventions for depression in India: A feasibility and acceptability study — R1/PR7
Résumé fourni par la source
The Promoting Effective mEntal health care through peeR Supervision (PEERS) platform aimed to facilitate quality-assured psychotherapy to patients with depression by non-specialist providers (NSPs) who were trained to deliver a structured, behavioural activation psychotherapy. This multi-method study examined the feasibility and acceptability of the PEERS platform among N = 399 NSPs in Madhya Pradesh (MP) (n = 302) and Goa (n = 97). Feasibility was assessed through quantitative app usage metrics, such as the proportion of trained NSPs who used the app, and the number of treatment sessions recorded, supervision attendance and quality ratings. Acceptability was assessed through focus group discussions in MP and in-depth interviews in Goa, exploring NSPs’ perceived barriers and facilitators in using PEERS. Of 399 NSPs trained, 302 (75.7%) used the PEERS app and 285 (94.4%) treated at least 1 patient. Of the 7,161 treatment sessions conducted, most (6,762, 94.4%) were recorded, with ~20% rated for therapy quality. Qualitatively, NSPs reported that the PEERS app simplified the workflow, reduced paperwork, eased rescheduling counselling sessions and facilitated effective supervision sessions. Barriers included audio recording interruptions in MP, and data syncing and poor quality of audio recordings in Goa. In conclusion, the PEERS platform was perceived as largely feasible and acceptable in two distinct contexts.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Review: Digital supervision of non-specialist providers delivering psychosocial interventions for depression in India: A feasibility and acceptability study — R1/PR7
- Date Crossref
- 04/06/2026
- Éditeur
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Type
- peer-review
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.