4.6 Article

Mental health and psychosocial support in humanitarian settings: research priorities for 2021-30

期刊

LANCET GLOBAL HEALTH
卷 11, 期 6, 页码 E969-E975

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S2214-109X(23)00128-6

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aims to develop a consensus-based research agenda for mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS) interventions in humanitarian settings for 2021-30. Through qualitative studies, consultations, and expert panel evaluations, a final list of 20 research questions was selected and rated, with a focus on applied research and systems-oriented implementation. Answering these questions requires improved partnerships and equity in funding for MHPSS research in low-income and middle-income countries.
We describe an effort to develop a consensus-based research agenda for mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS) interventions in humanitarian settings for 2021-30. By engaging a broad group of stakeholders, we generated research questions through a qualitative study (in Indonesia, Lebanon, and Uganda; n=101), consultations led by humanitarian agencies (n=259), and an expert panel (n=227; 51% female participants and 49% male participants; 84% of participants based in low-income and middle-income countries). The expert panel selected and rated a final list of 20 research questions. After rating, the MHPSS research agenda favoured applied research questions (eg, regarding workforce strengthening and monitoring and evaluation practices). Compared with research priorities for the previous decade, there is a shift towards systems-oriented implementation research (eg, multisectoral integration and ensuring sustainability) rather than efficacy research. Answering these research questions selected and rated by the expert panel will require improved partnerships between researchers, practitioners, policy makers, and communities affected by humanitarian crises, and improved equity in funding for MHPSS research in low-income and middle-income countries.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据