ArticleHRB open research2024
Factors influencing mental health service delivery during public health emergencies: a scoping review protocol.
Article in HRB open research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Unforeseeable public health emergencies (PHEs) profoundly impact psychological well-being and disrupt mental health care provision in affected regions. To enhance preparedness for future emergencies, it is crucial to understand the effectiveness of mental health services, their underlying mechanisms, the populations they are tailored to, and their appropriateness across distinct emergencies. The aim of this scoping review will be to explore how mental health services have responded to PHEs, focusing on their effectiveness as well as barriers and facilitators to implementation. Methods: Following the five-stage Arksey-O'Malley guidance, as updated further by Westphaln and colleagues, this mixed-methods scoping review will search academic and grey literature. Publications related to mental health interventions and supports delivered during PHEs will be considered for inclusion. The interventions and supports are operationally defined as any adaptations to mental health service provision at the international, national, regional or community level as a consequence of PHEs. The "Four Ss" framework will be utilised to provide structure for the evidence synthesis and inform categorisation of interventions and supports delivered during PHEs. Any research methodology will be considered for inclusion. Two reviewers will independently screen titles, abstracts, and full texts of publications against eligibility criteria. The gathered data will be depicted in accordance with the Four Ss" framework through the utilisation of descriptive/analytical statistics and supplemented by narrative exploration of findings. Conclusions: Considering the diverse research methodologies and the varied applicability of services in different contexts of PHEs, this review will offer insights into the type, effectiveness, and implementation barriers and facilitators of mental health interventions and supports delivered during PHEs. By employing the "Four Ss" framework, the review will guide decision-making bodies in identifying effective and practical aspects of mental health system operations during emergencies.
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.