Efficacy of a peer-delivered group psychological intervention to reduce psychological distress among university students in India: a randomised controlled trial using an active control condition; [Eficacia de una intervenci psicolica grupal realizada por pares para la reducci del malestar psicologico en estudiantes universitarios en India: ensayo clico aleatorizado empleando una condici de control activo]
controlled trial; depression and anxiety; group support; non-specific factors; Scalable intervention; video teleconferencing
Background: Brief psychological interventions in low-and-middle-income-countries (LMICs) have been typically tested against usual or enhanced usual care (EUC). This design precludes understanding of the role of non-specific factors in influencing outcomes. Objective: This study evaluated an adapted version of WHOs Problem Management Plus (gPM+), titled Coping with COVID, against an active control condition to reduce anxiety and depression during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: In this two-arm, single-blind, randomised controlled trial, young adults aged 1824 years who screened positive for COVID-19 related psychological distress in Bengaluru (India) were randomly allocated to either Coping with COVID (n = 91) or non-directive Supportive Counselling (SC; n = 92) groups. Coping with COVID was a 6-sesion, group-based programme that taught coping strategies for stress. SC was a 6-sesion, group-based programme that offered non-directive support. The primary outcomes were anxiety and depression as measured by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scales (HADS) assessed at baseline, post-intervention, 2-months (primary outcome timepoint), and 6-months after treatment. Secondary outcomes included generalised worry, positive wellbeing, pandemic-related stress, and suicidal ideation. Results: Between October 2021 and December 2022, 183 participants were enrolled into the trial. Relative to SC, Coping with COVID did not lead to significant reductions in anxiety (mean difference 0.24 [95% CI, ?1.01,1.48], p>.05), or depression (mean difference.03 [95% CI, ?1.19, 1.26], p>.05). Similarly, there were no significant differences between conditions for all secondary outcomes. Conclusions: The findings suggest that the benefits of strategies that comprise transdiagnostic scalable psychological interventions may not surpass non-specific factors in driving symptom reduction. Clinical implications: There is a need to further evaluate the role of non-specific factors in scalable psychological programmes because focusing on these may have implications for ease of training and implementation. Trial registration:Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry identifier: ACTRN12621001064897. 2025 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
Keyan, Dharani; Dawson, Katie S.; Yadav, Srishti; Azevedo, Suzanna; Choi-Christou, Jasmine; Maliakkal, Deepthi J.; Pillai, Mohan K.; Chokani, Ritika; Thomas, Elizabeth; George, Tony S.; Bryant, Richard A.
European Journal of Psychotraumatology;Volume;16;Issue;1;Article No.;2503603;
All Open Access; Gold Open Access; Green Open Access
https://doi.org/10.1080/20008066.2025.2503603 https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105007297776?origin=resultslist
Keyan D., University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia; Dawson K.S., University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia; Yadav S., University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia; Azevedo S., University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia; Choi-Christou J., University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia; Maliakkal D.J., CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Karnataka, Bengaluru, India; Pillai M.K., CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Karnataka, Bengaluru, India; Chokani R., CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Karnataka, Bengaluru, India; Thomas E., CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Karnataka, Bengaluru, India; George T.S., CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Karnataka, Bengaluru, India; Bryant R.A., University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia