Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30486900›Full record

SynthesisSystematic reviews2018

Barriers and facilitators to the integration of mental health services into primary health care: a systematic review.

Edith K Wakida, Zohray M Talib, Dickens Akena, Elialilia S Okello, Alison Kinengyere, Arnold Mindra, Celestino Obua

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Systematic reviews, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 114 papers, 11 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
114citing papers in PubMed, 11 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

114 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Trial
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

54 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Edith K WakidaDepartment of Psychiatry, Mbarara University of Science and Technology, Mbarara, Uganda. ediwakida@must.ac.ug.ORCID 0000-0001-6949-8474
Zohray M TalibDepartment of Medical Education, California University of Science and Medicine, California, USA.
Dickens AkenaAfrica Center for Systematic Reviews and Knowledge Translation, College of Health Sciences Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda.
Elialilia S OkelloDepartment of Psychiatry, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda.
Alison KinengyereDepartment of Psychiatry, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda.
Arnold MindraOffice of Research Administration, Mbarara University of Science and Technology, Mbarara, Uganda.
Celestino ObuaDepartment of Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Mbarara University of Science and Technology, Mbarara, Uganda.

Funding

Mbarara University Research Training Initiative (MURTI)D43TW010128 · FIC · MBARARA UNIVERSITY/SCIENCE/ TECHNOLOGY · PI OBUA, CELESTINO · 2015 to 2019
$3.5M
FIC NIH HHS D43 TW010128
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe objective of the review was to synthesize evidence of barriers and facilitators to the integration of mental health services into PHC from existing literature. The structure of the review was guided by the SPIDER framework which involves the following: Sample or population of interest-primary care providers (PCPs); Phenomenon of Interest-integration of mental health services into primary health care (PHC); Design-influenced robustness and analysis of the study; Evaluation-outcomes included subjective outcomes (views and attitudes); and Research type-qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods studies.

methodsStudies that described mental health integration in PHC settings, involved primary care providers, and presented barriers/facilitators of mental health integration into PHC were included in the review. The sources of information included PubMed, PsycINFO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled trials, the WHO website, and OpenGrey. Assessment of bias and quality was done using two separate tools: the Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP) qualitative checklist and the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies.

resultsTwenty studies met the inclusion criteria out of the 3353 search results. The most frequently reported barriers to integration of mental health services into PHC were (i) attitudes regarding program acceptability, appropriateness, and credibility; (ii) knowledge and skills; (iii) motivation to change; (iv) management and/or leadership; and (v) financial resources. In order to come up with an actionable approach to addressing the barriers, these factors were further analyzed along a behavior change theory. DISCUSSION: We have shown that the integration of mental health services into PHC has been carried out by various countries. The analysis from this review provides evidence to inform policy on the existing barriers and facilitators to the implementation of the mental health integration policy option. Not all databases may have been exhausted. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO 2016 (Registration Number: CRD42016052000 ) and published in BMC Systematic Reviews August 2017.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeDelivery of Health Care, IntegratedHealth PersonnelHumansMental Health ServicesPrimary Health CareBarriers and facilitatorsIntegrationMental health servicesPrimary health careSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID30486900
PMCPMC6264616

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.