CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 28Mental Health Treatment and AccessHistorical Psychiatry and Medical PracticesHealth Policy Implementation Science

Built for expansion': The 'social life' of the WHO's mental health GAP Intervention Guide

Mills, China, Hilberg, Eva·2019·Sociology of Health & Illness
DOI 10.1111/1467-9566.12870
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The focus of this study is the WHO's mhGAP‐Intervention Guide (mhGAP‐IG) 2.0 (2016), an evidence‐based tool and guideline to help detect, diagnose and manage the most common mental disorders, designed for use by non‐specialists globally but particularly in low‐ and middle‐income countries. This research is a starting point in tracing the multiple ‘doings’ of mhGAP‐IG – connecting questions of how it is ‘done’ and what does it ‘do’ – to the living histories and wider global mental health assemblages that make the tool possible and shape its global circulation. We examine the conditions of possibility that produce and legitimate mhGAP‐IG, and the ways these are ‘black boxed’ through casting mhGAP‐IG in technical rather than epistemological terms. The study illuminates how its explicit design for global expansion positions mhGAP‐IG as open to questioning from those who are technical ‘insiders’ and setting the epistemological parameters of its own critique. It analyses mhGAP‐IG as an ‘inscription device’ that inscribes and materialises algorithmic imaginaries of mental health that impact on design and local implementation. This study is one attempt at initiating dialogue with the WHO from perspectives and methodological approaches not usually included in the conversation.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/1467-9566.12870

Cites

53 of 54 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Global mental health has relied on a strategic and convincing public discourse to legitimise its existence, operations, and funding pledges.

    “the field of global mental health has relied on a strategic and convincing public discourse to legitimise its existence, operations, and funding pledges”

    From Throwing therapy at the problem mental health and humanitarian intervention in Palabek refugee settlement, northern Uganda (2023) · cites this paper as Mills and Hilberg 2019

    In “The ‘gap’ in mhGAP” (p. 5), the paper says mhGAP uses treatment-gap metrics to create urgency, mobilise a moral call for action, and make an economic case for interventions. This supports the claim’s point about persuasive public framing, but the paper does not establish that the field of global mental health relied on such discourse to legitimise its existence, operations, and funding pledges. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. ---. 2006. 'Making Up People.' London Review of Books , August 17.
  2. Jha, Arun, and Nidesh Sapkota. 2013. 'Dementia Assessment and Management Protocol for Doctors in Nepal.' Jjournal of the Nepal Medical Association 52 (189): 292-98.
  3. Maes, K. (2017). The Lives of Community Health Workers: Local Labour and Global Health in Urban Ethiopia . London and New York; Routledge.
  4. Münster, Daniel. 2015. 'Farmers' Suicide and the Moral Economy of Agriculture: Victimhood, Voice, and Agro-Environmental Responsibility in South India.' In Suicide and Agency , by Ludek Broz and Daniel Münster, 105-25. London & New York: Routledge.
  5. Rich, Emma, and Andy Miah. 2017. 'Mobile, Wearable and Ingestible Health Technologies: Towards a Critical Research Agenda.' Health Sociology Review 26 (1): 84-97.
  6. Sunder Rajan, Kaushik. 2017. Pharmocracy: Value, Politics, and Knowledge in Global Biomedicine . Durham: Duke University Press Books.
  7. Timmermans, Stefan. and Berg, Marc. 2003. The Gold Standard: The Challenge of EvidenceBased and Standardization in Health Care . Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Mills, C., & Hilberg, E.
Affiliations
  • University of London (GB)
  • University of Sheffield (GB)
Corresponding author
Mills, China
ORCID
Venue
Sociology of Health & Illness
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2019-10
Volume
41
Issue
S1
Pages
162-175
ISSN
  • 0141-9889 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-9566
DOI
10.1111/1467-9566.12870
OpenAlex
W2916251857
Cited by
27
References
54
Citations by year
2025: 6 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2
FWCI
4.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor, 9 d)
Locations
  • Sociology of Health & Illness (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
  • City Research Online (City University London) (acceptedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Historical Psychiatry and Medical Practices
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
Keywords
global mental health, mental health guidelines, non-specialist mental health care, low- and middle-income countries, algorithmic imaginaries, international expansion
MeSH terms
Mental Disorders, Developing Countries, Humans, Mental Health Services, Politics, World Health Organization, Evidence-Based Practice, Capacity Building, Mobile Applications

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review