ArticleBulletin of the World Health Organization2008
Evaluating the WHO Assessment Instrument for Mental Health Systems by comparing mental health policies in four countries.
Article in Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Policy development and challenges of global mental health: a systematic review of published studies of national-level mental health policies.BMC psychiatry · 2018Pooled it
- Co-Production of a Flexibly Delivered Relapse Prevention Tool to Support the Self-Management of Long-Term Mental Health Conditions: Co-Design and User Testing Study.JMIR formative research · 2024Article
- Mental healthcare services in Kenyan counties: a descriptive survey of four counties in Western Kenya.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Media Coverage of Pedophilia and Its Impact on Help-Seeking Persons with Pedophilia in Germany-A Focus Group Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- The Cross-Country Comparison Model for Labor Participation (CCC Model for LP) of Persons with Chronic Diseases.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2022Review
- Comparison of Mental Health Treatment Adequacy and Costs in Public Hospitals in Boston and Madrid.The journal of behavioral health services & research · 2019Article
- Ideal and reality: do countries adopt and follow recommended procedures in comprehensive multiyear planning guidelines for national immunization programmes?Implementation science : IS · 2015Article
- The role of common mental and physical disorders in days out of role in the Iraqi general population: results from the WHO World Mental Health Surveys.Journal of psychiatric research · 2014Article
- Public sector mental health systems in South Africa: inter-provincial comparisons and policy implications.Social psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology · 2010Article
- Author reply to: evaluation of the WHO Assessment Instrument for Mental Health Systems.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2008Article
- Evaluation of the WHO Assessment Instrument for Mental Health Systems.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2008Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mental health is a low priority in most countries around the world. Minimal research and resources have been invested in mental health at the national level. As a result, WHO has developed the Assessment Instrument for Mental Health Systems (WHO-AIMS) to encourage countries to gather data and to re-evaluate their national mental health policy. This paper demonstrates the utility and limitations of WHO-AIMS by applying the model to four countries with different cultures, political histories and public health policies: Iraq, Japan, the Philippines and The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. WHO-AIMS provides a useful model for analysing six domains: policy and legislative framework; mental health services; mental health in primary care; human resources; education of the public at large; and monitoring and research. This is especially important since most countries do not have experts in mental health policy or resources to design their own evaluation tools for mental health systems. Furthermore, WHO-AIMS provides a standardized database for cross-country comparisons. However, limitations of the instrument include the neglect of the politics of mental health policy development, underestimation of the role of culture in mental health care utilization, and questionable measurement validity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.