{rfName}
Pi

Indexed in

License and use

Icono OpenAccess

Citations

8

Altmetrics

Grant support

This study was funded and made possible by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) support, under the Health Evaluation and Applied Research Development (HEARD), Cooperative Agreement No. AID-OAA-A-17-00002.

Analysis of institutional authors

Bernal, MateoAuthor

Share

July 9, 2024
Publications
>
Article
Sí

Piloting a community-based psychosocial group intervention designed to reduce distress among conflict-affected adults in Colombia: a mixed-method study of remote, hybrid, and in-person modalities during the COVID-19 pandemic

Publicated to:International Journal of Mental Health Systems. 17 (1): 35- - 2023-10-24 17(1), DOI: 10.1186/s13033-023-00597-4

Authors: Rattner, Michel; James, Leah Emily; Botero, Juan Fernando; Chiari, Hernando; Beltran, Guillermo Andres Bastidas; Bernal, Mateo; Cardona, Juan Nicolas; Gantiva, Carlos

Affiliations

Heartland Alliance Int, 208 S LaSalle St,Suite 1300, Chicago, IL 60604 USA - Author
Palo Alto Univ, Dept Psychol, Palo Alto, CA 94304 USA - Author
Univ Los Andes, Dept Psychol, Bogota, Colombia - Author

Abstract

Background Community members in Quibdo (Choco, Colombia) are highly vulnerable to psychosocial problems associated with the internal armed conflict, poverty, and insufficient public services, and exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. A pilot study was conducted with conflict-affected adults in Quibdo to assess feasibility and outcomes of a community-based psychosocial support group intervention using three different intervention modalities: in-person, remote (conducted online), and hybrid (half of sessions in-person, half-remote). This group model integrated problem-solving and culturally based expressive activities and was facilitated by local community members with supervision by mental health professionals.Methods This study utilized a mixed-explanatory sequential design (a quantitative phase deriving in a qualitative phase) with 39 participants and 8 staff members. Participants completed quantitative interviews before and after an eight-week group intervention. A subset of 17 participants also completed in-depth qualitative interviews and a focus group discussion was conducted with staff at post-intervention.Results From pre- to post-intervention, participants in all modalities demonstrated improved wellbeing and reduced symptoms of generalized distress, anxiety, depression, and posttraumatic stress. Use of coping skills varied across modalities, with remote groups associated with a decrease in some forms of coping, including use of social support. In qualitative interviews and the focus group discussion, participants and staff described logistical challenges and successes, as well as facilitators of change such as problem resolution, emotional regulation and social support with variations across modalities, such that remote groups provided fewer opportunities for social support and cohesion.Conclusions Results offer preliminary evidence that this model can address psychosocial difficulties across the three modalities, while also identifying potential risks and challenges, therefore providing useful guidance for service delivery in conflict-affected settings during the COVID-19 pandemic and other challenging contexts. Implications of this study for subsequent implementation of a Randomized Control Trial (RCT) are discussed.

Keywords

Community-basedCovid-19Elements treatment approachGroup interventionHybridImplementationIn-persoIn-personLay-providersLow-middle-income countriesMental-healthMixed methodsRemoteVictim

Quality index

Bibliometric impact. Analysis of the contribution and dissemination channel

The work has been published in the journal International Journal of Mental Health Systems due to its progression and the good impact it has achieved in recent years, according to the agency Scopus (SJR), it has become a reference in its field. In the year of publication of the work, 2023, it was in position , thus managing to position itself as a Q1 (Primer Cuartil), in the category Health Policy.

From a relative perspective, and based on the normalized impact indicator calculated from the Field Citation Ratio (FCR) of the Dimensions source, it yields a value of: 2.61, which indicates that, compared to works in the same discipline and in the same year of publication, it ranks as a work cited above average. (source consulted: Dimensions Jul 2025)

Specifically, and according to different indexing agencies, this work has accumulated citations as of 2025-07-03, the following number of citations:

  • WoS: 2
  • Europe PMC: 3

Impact and social visibility

From the perspective of influence or social adoption, and based on metrics associated with mentions and interactions provided by agencies specializing in calculating the so-called "Alternative or Social Metrics," we can highlight as of 2025-07-03:

  • The use, from an academic perspective evidenced by the Altmetric agency indicator referring to aggregations made by the personal bibliographic manager Mendeley, gives us a total of: 41.
  • The use of this contribution in bookmarks, code forks, additions to favorite lists for recurrent reading, as well as general views, indicates that someone is using the publication as a basis for their current work. This may be a notable indicator of future more formal and academic citations. This claim is supported by the result of the "Capture" indicator, which yields a total of: 41 (PlumX).

With a more dissemination-oriented intent and targeting more general audiences, we can observe other more global scores such as:

  • The Total Score from Altmetric: 0.5.
  • The number of mentions on the social network X (formerly Twitter): 1 (Altmetric).

It is essential to present evidence supporting full alignment with institutional principles and guidelines on Open Science and the Conservation and Dissemination of Intellectual Heritage. A clear example of this is:

  • The work has been submitted to a journal whose editorial policy allows open Open Access publication.

Leadership analysis of institutional authors

This work has been carried out with international collaboration, specifically with researchers from: Colombia; United States of America.