MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1585544831

How can mental health be integrated into health system strengthening?

2011· article· en· W1585544831 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rachel Jenkins, Florence Baingana, Raheelah Ahmad, David McDaid, Rifat Atun

Notice bibliographique

RevuePubMed · 2011
Typearticle
Langueen
DomainePsychology
ThématiqueMental Health Treatment and Access
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMental healthData scienceMedicineWorld Wide WebComputer sciencePsychiatry
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

This editorial accompanies the last in our series of four articles on mental health and the global health agenda.1 It addresses health system challenges, which impede the improvement of mental health outcomes. The article briefly analyses financial resource flows for mental health, explores health system factors that influence effective delivery of mental health care and provides a set of actions to address them. The four papers published in this series, and their accompanying editorials, have identified a number of health system bottlenecks which impede delivery of effective mental health care in developing countries, including limited investments in mental health, poor health sector infrastructure, limited access to medicines, a shortage of human resources, inadequate support and supervision of health workers and weak capacity at local and central levels in low-income countries to incorporate mental health broadly into health sector plans.1–4 These articles also describe huge gaps in care and highlight in particular the weak human resource planning for primary and secondary care, ineffective human resource retention policies, and a lack of continuing professional development. A number of actions are necessary to effectively address these health system bottlenecks to delivery of mental health care in order to counter the high prevalence of mental disorders, to build mental capital at individual and population level in order to avoid the burden of mental disorder as much as possible and to prepare health systems for projected increases in mental disorders resulting from demographic change. These actions include: more effective integration of mental health into general health policy and essential healthcare packages; health systems research to demonstrate costs and effectiveness of basic mental healthcare packages in different countries and the effectiveness of interventions to address mental disorders; better identification and use of levers and entry points, to enable increased participation of mental health professionals and stakeholders in health sector reforms; policy actions to strengthen the linkage between mental health, public health and intersectoral policies; enhanced involvement of civil society and the community in needs assessment, planning and delivery of mental health and more effective resource mobilisation strategies to address gaps in financing. In addition to country level initiatives, a number of internationally driven actions will help increase awareness for mental health and help foster greater inclusion of mental health in international targets. For international technical agencies and bilateral and multilateral donors the opportunities for engagement with mental health include actions relating to achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), development of poverty reduction strategies in low-income countries, development of country assistance strategies and initiatives aimed at strengthening health systems, such as those through the Health Systems Funding Platform5 and the International Health Partnership,6 and improved synergies with financing and delivery of programmes for communicable diseases such as AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria that substantially affect mental health affected individuals. Mental disorders create a substantial burden of disease in low-and middle-income countries, accounting for around 8% of the total disease burden.7,8 In addition, mental disorders have severe socio-economic consequences for the affected individuals, often pushing them into ‘skid row’ and impoverishment. There is also a growing body of evidence which demonstrates cost-effectiveness of interventions addressing mental disorders9–12 and the affordability of these in low-and middle-income country settings.13 Yet in spite of the substantial burden of disease and its severe socio-economic consequences for affected individuals and their families, and inspite of the evidence base for highly cost-effective interventions to address them, mental health has received very little attention in the international health agenda. Mental health is not included in the MDGs, in spite of its well-demonstrated links to poverty, education, gender, infectious disorders, child health and maternal health. Hence, much needs to be done to address this unawareness and evidence of a policy gap. In addition to generating evidence on what works to address the growing burden of mental disorders in low- and middle-income countries, concerted efforts are needed to ensure that available evidence is translated to policy and practice. Efforts are also needed to ensure that mental health is recognised as an addressable burden by key international agencies and incorporated into the global agendas of the United Nations system and the funding agencies investing in addressing poverty, education, gender, child health and maternal health, as well as communicable diseases and non-communicable disorders, through a number of approaches that include access to effective medicines and preventive interventions, health system strengthening and expansion of human resources for health. In addition to international efforts, country level investment is needed to ensure that mental health is on the agenda of senior policy makers and is included in key national policy and planning meetings on resource allocation, communicable and non-communicable disease and health systems strengthening. In particular, mental health needs to be included in medium-term expenditure frameworks, national health sector strategies and essential packages of health, as well as district health budgets. However, to effectively address mental illness, multisectoral and multi-axial approaches are needed, requiring integration of mental health into social, educational and criminal justice sector dialogue, policies and reforms. International funding could be used to catalyse development of integrated service delivery models that can simultaneously address communicable and non-communicable disease, including mental illness. However, structural changes alone will not solve the burden of communicable and non-communicable diseases, including mental health disorders. Human resources and medicines are needed to expand access to care. Recruitment and retention of human resources for health has been particularly challenging. To address health workforce gaps there is a need for sustained funding to systematically strengthen health systems to expand service coverage through investments in staff, training and equipment. Bilateral organisations with significant budgets such as the Department for International Development (DFID), the Danish International Development Agency (DANIDA), the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA), the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA), Noraid, Finnaid and organisations such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation are well positioned to take a significant leadership role on mental health (given its significant impacts on general health, education and the economy), in both international fora and in policy dialogue within countries in order to encourage multilateral organisations such as WHO and the World Bank which are still not routinely mainstreaming mental health within their general health sector activities.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,034
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,096
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Théorique ou conceptuel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Commentaire · Signal consensuel: Commentaire
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,034
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,182

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0340,096
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,003
Bibliométrie0,0040,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0040,012
Communication savante0,0140,029
Science ouverte0,0050,012
Intégrité de la recherche0,0200,026
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0180,003

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,071
Tête enseignante GPT0,319
Écart entre enseignants0,248 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeThéorique ou conceptuel
Domainenon disponible
GenreCommentaire

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations2
Publié2011
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revuePubMed→Même sujetMental Health Treatment and Access→Travaux en français237 207→