scholarly journals Virtual World Café Method for Identifying Mental Health Research Priorities: Methodological Case Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 291
Author(s):  
Michelle Banfield ◽  
Amelia Gulliver ◽  
Alyssa R. Morse
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Lived Experience ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Virtual World ◽  
Mental Health Problems ◽  
Research Priorities ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Mental Health Research ◽  
Target Number ◽  
Single Room

People with lived experience of mental health problems as both consumers and carers can bring significant expertise to the research process. However, the methods used to gather this information and their subsequent results can vary markedly. This paper describes the methods for two virtual World Cafés held to gather data on consumer and carer priorities for mental health research. Several methodological processes and challenges arose during data collection, including the achieved recruitment for each group (n = 4, n = 7) falling significantly short of the target number of 20 participants per group. This led to departures from planned methods (i.e., the use of a single ‘room’, rather than multiple breakout rooms). Despite this, the participants in the virtual World Cafés were able to generate over 200 ideas for research priorities, but not identify agreed-upon priorities. Virtual World Cafés can quickly generate a significant volume of data; however, they may not be as effective at generating consensus.

Valuing the voice of lived experience of eating disorders in the research process: Benefits and considerations

2021 ◽  
pp. 000486742199879
Author(s):  
Selma Musić ◽  
Rosiel Elwyn ◽  
Grace Fountas ◽  
Inge Gnatt ◽  
Zoe M Jenkins ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Eating Disorders ◽  
Eating Disorder ◽  
Lived Experience ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Mental Health Research ◽  
Direct Involvement ◽  
The Voice ◽  
Process Benefits

Although the inclusion of individuals with lived experience is encouraged within the research process, there remains inconsistent direct involvement in many mental health fields. Within the eating disorders field specifically, there is a very strong and increasing presence of lived experience advocacy. However, due to a number of potential challenges, research undertaken in consultation or in collaboration with individuals with lived experience of an eating disorder is scarce. This paper describes the significant benefits of the inclusion of individuals with lived experience in research. The specific challenges and barriers faced in eating disorders research are also outlined. It is concluded that in addition to existing guidelines on working with lived experience collaborators in mental health research, more specific procedures are required when working with those with eating disorders.

scholarly journals The development of a national nutrition and mental health research agenda with comparison of priorities among diverse stakeholders

2017 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 712-725 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen M Davison ◽  
Carla D’Andreamatteo ◽  
Scott Mitchell ◽  
Pat Vanderkooy
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Lived Experience ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Research Agenda ◽  
Service Providers ◽  
Research Priorities ◽  
Mental Health Research ◽  
Health Condition ◽  
Mental Health Condition ◽  
Policy Makers

AbstractObjectiveTo develop a national nutrition and mental health research agenda based on the engagement of diverse stakeholders and to assess research priorities by stakeholder groups.DesignA staged, integrated and participatory initiative was implemented to structure a national nutrition and mental health research agenda that included: (i) national stakeholder consultations to prioritize research questions; (ii) a workshop involving national representatives from research, policy and practice to further define priorities; (iii) triangulation of data to formulate the agenda; and (iv) test hypotheses about stakeholder influences on decision making.SettingCanada.SubjectsDiverse stakeholders including researchers, academics, administrators, service providers, policy makers, practitioners, non-profit, industry and funding agency representatives, front-line workers, individuals with lived experience of a mental health condition and those who provide care for them.ResultsThis first-of-its-kind research priority-setting initiative showed points of agreement among diverse stakeholders (n 899) on research priorities aimed at service provision; however, respondents with lived experience of a mental health condition (themselves or a family member) placed emphasis on prevention and mental health promotion-based research. The final integrated agenda identified four research priorities, including programmes and services, service provider roles, the determinants of health and knowledge translation and exchange. These research priorities aim to identify effective models of care, enhance collaboration, inform policy makers and foster knowledge dissemination.ConclusionsSince a predictor of research uptake is the involvement of relevant stakeholders, a sustained and deliberate effort must continue to engage collaboration that will lead to the optimization of nutrition and mental health-related outcomes.

scholarly journals Invited commentary on … Mental health research priorities in low- and middle-income countries

2009 ◽  
Vol 195 (4) ◽  
pp. 364-365 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ricardo Araya
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Research Priorities ◽  
Mental Health Research ◽  
Health Priorities ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Simple Process ◽  
Inequalities In Health ◽  
Middle Income Countries ◽  
Low And Middle Income

SummaryThere are huge inequalities in health research within and between countries. It is argued that this may hinder the process of setting and tackling mental health priorities. If this were true, establishing research priorities would be important. However, this is not a simple process and one must be aware of its limitations. Despite a plethora of declarations, funding for mental health research in low- and middle-income countries remains hard to find. In the absence of funding, establishing research priorities is seen by many as an exercise of lesser importance.

scholarly journals Pharmaceutical industry, academia and people with experience of mental illness as partners in research: a need for ethical guidance

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. 196
Author(s):  
Sapfo Lignou ◽  
Ilina Singh
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Mental Illness ◽  
Lived Experience ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Mental Health Research ◽  
Research Projects ◽  
Research Institutions ◽  
Research Partnerships ◽  
Moral Framework ◽  
Ethical Guidance

Background: Several social and policy developments have led to research partnerships in mental health research, which depart from traditional research models. One form of such partnerships is among research institutions, industry (pharmaceutical and biotech) and people with lived experience of mental illness (RIPs). There are several benefits but also ethical challenges in RIPs. An ethics-based approach to anticipating and addressing such ethical issues in mental health research is lacking. Given the expansion of RIPs in treatment development for mental health illness, guidance to support ethical and trustworthy collaborative mental health research projects is essential. Methods: To develop a moral framework for evaluating the ethics of RIPs, we systematically searched PubMed for peer-reviewed literature discussing good practices in research partnerships. Searches were also conducted in websites of known organizations supporting patient engagement with industry in mental health research and in the references of short-listed articles. Following application of exclusion criteria, remaining articles were critically examined and summarised to synthesise principles for ethically acceptable RIPs and inform clear guidance and practices. Results: Critical analysis and synthesis of the short-listed articles highlighted the need for two sets of principles to guide ethical RIPs: principles for (a) RIPs as a trustworthy enterprise (e.g. public accountability, transparency) and (b) fair RIPs (e.g. effective governance, respect). We discuss the application of these principles in problem-solving strategies that can support best practice in establishing fair and successful mental health research partnerships among research institutions, industry and people with lived experience of mental illness. Conclusions: Ethical guidance is needed to prevent and address challenges in RIPs and to promote the scientific and social benefits of these new research partnership models in mental health research. We show how the proposed moral framework can guide research partners in designing, sustaining and assessing ethical and trustworthy collaborative mental health research projects.

scholarly journals Patient oriented research in mental health: matching laboratory to life and beyond in Canada

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jenessa N. Johnston ◽  
Lisa Ridgway ◽  
Sarah Cary-Barnard ◽  
Josh Allen ◽  
Carla L. Sanchez-Lafuente ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Clinical Research ◽  
Lived Experience ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Mental Health Research ◽  
Great Utility ◽  
The Future ◽  
Primary Investigator ◽  
Oriented Research

AbstractAs patient-oriented research gains popularity in clinical research, the lack of patient input in foundational science grows more evident. Research has shown great utility in active partnerships between patient partners and scientists, yet many researchers are still hesitant about listening to the voices of those with lived experience guide and shape their experiments. Mental health has been a leading area for patient movements such as survivor-led research, however the stigma experienced by these patients creates difficulties not present in other health disciplines. The emergence of COVID-19 has also created unique circumstances that need to be addressed. Through this lens, we have taken experiences from our patient partners, students, and primary investigator to create recommendations for the better facilitation of patient-oriented research in foundational science in Canada. With these guidelines, from initial recruitment and leading to sustaining meaningful partnerships, we hope to encourage other researchers that patient-oriented research is necessary for the future of mental health research and foundational science.

To The Question of Destigmatization of Psychiatry and Mentally III Persons In The Modern Society

2016 ◽  
Vol 33 (S1) ◽  
pp. S523-S523
Author(s):  
S. Vladimirova ◽  
V. Lebedeva ◽  
E. Gutkevich ◽  
A. Semke ◽  
N. Bokhan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Mental Health Service ◽  
Health Service ◽  
Mentally Ill ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Mental Health Problems ◽  
Mental Health Research ◽  
Health Problems ◽  
Mental Health Research Institute ◽  
Mentally Ill Persons

In recent decades, new medications have been developed that entailed possibility of rehabilitation and socialization of mentally ill persons.PurposeTo consider a phenomenon of destigmatization of mentally ill persons on the example of the analysis of screening-questioning in mental health service.MethodsRandomized screening-questioning of participants of Open Doors Day in the clinics of Mental Health Research Institute (Tomsk, Russia) in connection with World Mental Health Day in October, 2015.ResultsOne hundred and forty-six residents of Tomsk and inhabitants of the Tomsk Region as well as other cities visited Mental Health Research Institute. 76,5% of them visited mental health service for the first time. More than a half of visitors (51%) was the most able-bodied age group – 20-50 years old; elderly people – 20%. According to many-year observation of authors of the work, there is a gradual destigmatization of people with mental health problems. Process of destigmatization will develop further, and mass media should also be engaged in it. One more moment should be emphasized – reduction of self-stigmatization. Though people do not still aim to seek for psychiatric help at the appropriate institutions (they prefer to visit the psychiatrist of the catchment area policlinic), they after all started recognizing presence of the problem, understanding the need of its overcoming, and possibility of its correction.ConclusionThe attitude of society towards people with mental health problems and towards psychiatry reasonably changes, and this promotes further development in the field of help to patients and their relatives.Disclosure of interestThe authors have not supplied their declaration of competing interest.

Article Commentary: Research Priorities in Mental Health

1986 ◽  
Vol 31 (8) ◽  
pp. 746-749 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dugal Campbell
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Relative Weight ◽  
Research Priorities ◽  
Research Area ◽  
Mental Health Research ◽  
Good Science ◽  
Using Data

Setting research priorities becomes necessary when the demand for research funds outstrips the supply; because it is impossible to do everything some topics must be chosen as more promising and pertinent than others. This paper proposes a scheme for estimating the relative merits of different branches of research within the whole field of mental health. The scheme for assessing the claims of each area is based upon three factors: the need for research in a particular topic (using data about prevalence of disorders; the costs attributable to disorders; and the like); the possibilities of doing good science; the estimated time to a clinical payoff It is argued that reasonable assessments of these three factors can be combined to give a relative weight to any particular research area. The judgements of relative weight can be progressively improved as more data becomes available. The argument is put that one way to obtain more funds for mental health research overall is to improve the ordering of the different areas within the field of mental health. Once mental health has its house in order it will be better equipped to make the case for mental health research.

scholarly journals Mental health research priorities in low- and middle-income countries of Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean

2009 ◽  
Vol 195 (4) ◽  
pp. 354-363 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Sharan ◽  
C. Gallo ◽  
O. Gureje ◽  
E. Lamberte ◽  
J. J. Mari ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Latin America ◽  
Burden Of Disease ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Research Priorities ◽  
Mail Survey ◽  
Mental Health Research ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
The Caribbean ◽  
Low And Middle Income

BackgroundStudies suggest a paucity of and lack of prioritisation in mental health research from low- and middle-income (LAMI) countries.AimsTo investigate research priorities in mental health among researchers and other stakeholders in LAMI countries.MethodWe used a two-stage design that included identification, through literature searches and snowball technique, of researchers and stakeholders in 114 countries of Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean; and a mail survey on priorities in research.ResultsThe study identified broad agreement between researchers and stakeholders and across regions regarding research priorities. Epidemiology (burden and risk factors), health systems and social science ranked highest for type of research. Depression/anxiety, substance use disorders and psychoses; and children and adolescents, women, and people exposed to violence/trauma were prioritised among the disorders and population groups respectively. Important criteria for prioritising research were burden of disease, social justice, and availability of funds. Stakeholder groups differed in the importance they gave to the personal interest of researchers as a criterion for prioritising research. Researchers' and stakeholders' priorities were consistent with burden of disease estimates, however suicide was underprioritised compared with its burden. Researchers' and stakeholders' priorities were also largely congruent with the researchers' projects.ConclusionsThe results of this first ever conducted survey of researchers and stakeholders regarding research priorities in mental health suggest that it should be possible to develop consensus at regional and international levels regarding the research agenda that is necessary to support health system objectives in LAMI countries.

scholarly journals Invited commentary on … Rethinking funding priorities in mental health research

2016 ◽  
Vol 208 (6) ◽  
pp. 510-511 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kamaldeep Bhui
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Service Provision ◽  
Research Priorities ◽  
Mental Health Research ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
The Public ◽  
Research Findings ◽  
Economic Perspectives

SummaryThis commentary takes up the notion proposed by Lewis-Fernández and colleagues that we need more balance in research priorities. Specifically, our reliance on neurobiology may be misplaced and likely to be unrewarding unless we ensure that: (a) research with better return for patients and the public is also pursued; (b) research findings are put into practice; and (c) we retain a focus on proportionate investment in service provision. Patient, public and economic perspectives should drive the decision making for better investment, and behaviour change might be better targeted at commissioners and policy makers rather than patients and providers.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document