ReviewGlobal mental health (Cambridge, England)2025
Addressing epistemic injustice in the mental healthcare of Indigenous people in Bangladesh: Implications for global mental health.
Review in Global mental health (Cambridge, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Qualitative accounts of community health workers providing and shaping mental health support in climate-vulnerable communities in Bangladesh.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Indigenous oral traditions and psychological well-being under modernization: from external valuation to relational selfhood.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Review
- Denialism: repudiation of anti-Indigenous racism in healthcare in Canada.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Whose voice is heard? Mental health professionals' involvement, epistemic injustice, and the ethics of psychiatric advance directives.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Review
- Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Validation of the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II) in the Community Otomi of the Mezquital Valley, Mexico.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Indigenous peoples across the world are at disproportionate risk of mental health problems. Colonial hegemony, cultural infiltration, language loss, land grabbing, limited access to healthcare services, including mental health, and geographical isolation - all in synergy - contribute to the heightened risk of developing mental health problems. Epistemic injustice, apparently unrelated, yet another major determinant - can also contribute to the higher prevalence of mental health problems among Indigenous peoples. Systemic exclusion and marginalization of Indigenous people from the generation, dissemination, and validation of knowledge - the central concept of epistemic injustice - provides an opportunity to reflect on the disproportionate rates of mental health problems. If epistemic injustice is left unaddressed, the impetus for Indigenous peoples to participate in conventional health practices would be greatly impeded. In this article, I present the case of Bangladesh, where the conventional mental healthcare system has historically been ignorant of the inclusion of Indigenous people's perspectives and lived experiences, eventually perpetuating epistemic injustice. Finally, I provide a framework to address epistemic injustices to reform mental healthcare in Bangladesh that can inform a system equipped with equitability, accessibility, cultural sensitivity, human rights, social justice, and collaborative alliance - key tenets of global mental health.
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.