The International Consortium on Mental Health Policy and Services: objectives, design and project implementation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The concept of the burden of disease, introduced and estimated for a broad range of diseases in the World Bank report of 1993 illustrated that mental and neurological disorders not only entail a higher burden than cancer, but are responsible, in developed and developing countries, for more than 15% of the total burden of all diseases. As a consequence, over the past decade, mental disorders have ranked increasingly highly on the international agenda for health. However, the fact that mental health and nervous system disorders are now high on the international health agenda is by no means a guarantee that the fate of patients suffering from these disorders in developing countries will improve. In most developing countries the treatment gap for mental and neurological disorders is still unacceptably high. To address this problem, an international network of collaborating institutions in low-income countries has been set up. The establishment and the achievements of this network--the International Consortium on Mental Health Policy and Services--are reported. Sixteen institutions in developing countries collaborate (supported by a small number of scientific resource centres in industrialized nations) in projects on applied mental health systems research. Over a two-year period, the network produced the key elements of a national mental health policy; provided tools and methods for assessing a country's current mental health status (context, needs and demands, programmes, services and care and outcomes); established a global network of expertise, i.e., institutions and experts, for use by countries wishing to reform their mental health policy, services and care; and generated guidelines and examples for upgrading mental health policy with due regard to the existing mental health delivery system and demographic, cultural and economic factors.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".