Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37854405›Full record

ReviewGlobal mental health (Cambridge, England)2023

Methods and tools to assess implementation of mental health policies and plans: A systematic review.

Akmal Alikhan Aliev, Hana Tomaskova, Petr Winkler, Yongjie Yon, Anna Kagstrom, Zoe Guerrero, Ledia Lazeri, Marge Reinap, Cassie Redlich, Ana Maria Tijerino Inestroza and 1 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Global mental health (Cambridge, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Mental health plans and policies across the WHO European region.Global mental health (Cambridge, England) · 2024
    Review
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

11 authors.

Akmal Alikhan AlievDepartment of Public Mental Health, National Institute of Mental Health, Klecany, Czechia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4071-4732
Hana TomaskovaDepartment of Public Mental Health, National Institute of Mental Health, Klecany, Czechia.
Petr WinklerDepartment of Public Mental Health, National Institute of Mental Health, Klecany, Czechia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7244-0051
Yongjie YonWorld Health Organization Regional Office for Europe, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Anna KagstromDepartment of Public Mental Health, National Institute of Mental Health, Klecany, Czechia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1455-1300
Zoe GuerreroDepartment of Public Mental Health, National Institute of Mental Health, Klecany, Czechia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8306-3610
Ledia LazeriWorld Health Organization Regional Office for Europe, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Marge ReinapWorld Health Organization Regional Office for Europe, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Cassie RedlichWorld Health Organization Regional Office for Europe, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Ana Maria Tijerino InestrozaWorld Health Organization Regional Office for Europe, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Jason MaurerWorld Health Organization Regional Office for Europe, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9096-9725

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mental health policies and plans (MHPPs) are important policy instruments and powerful tools to facilitate development of mental health systems and services across the world. We aimed to map and analyse methods and tools used to assess the extent, process and impact of implementing MHPPs. We systematically searched peer-reviewed and grey literature across seven scientific databases. We extracted and analysed the data on a) the characteristics of included studies (e.g., policy areas, region of origin, income setting) and b) the methodology and evaluation tools applied to assess the extent and process of implementation. We included 48 studies in the analyses. Twenty-six of these studies employed only qualitative methods (e.g., semi-structured interviews, focus group discussions, desk review, stakeholder consultations); 12 studies used quantitative methods (e.g., trend analysis, survey) and 10 used mixed-methods approaches. Generally, methods and tools used for assessment were described poorly with less than half of the studies providing partial or full details about them. Only three studies provided assessment of full policies. There is a lack of rigorous research to assess implementation MHPPs. Assessments of the implementation of entire MHPPs are almost non-existent. Strategies to assess the implementation of MHPPs should be an integral part of MHPPs.

Indexed as

assessment toolsglobal mental health policypolicy makingprevention strategies

Identifiers

PMID37854405
PMCPMC10579679

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.