Cited by 68Health and Conflict StudiesMigration, Health and TraumaMental Health Treatment and Access

Relevance or Excellence? Setting Research Priorities for Mental Health and Psychosocial Support in Humanitarian Settings

Open access
Tol, Wietse A., Patel, Vikram, Tomlinson, Mark, Baingana, Florence, Galappatti, Ananda, Silove, Derrick, Sondorp, Egbert, van Ommeren, Mark +2 more·2012·Harvard Review of Psychiatry

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Humanitarian crises are associated with an increase in mental disorders and psychological distress. Despite the emerging consensus on intervention strategies in humanitarian settings, the field of mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS) in humanitarian settings lacks a consensus-based research agenda. METHODS: From August 2009 to February 2010, we contacted policymakers, academic researchers, and humanitarian aid workers, and conducted nine semistructured focus group discussions with 114 participants in three locations (Peru, Uganda, and Nepal), in both the capitals and remote humanitarian settings. Local stakeholders representing a range of academic expertise (psychiatry, psychology, social work, child protection, and medical anthropology) and organizations (governments, universities, nongovernmental organizations, and U.N. agencies) were asked to identify priority questions for MHPSS research in humanitarian settings, and to discuss factors that hamper and facilitate research. RESULTS: Thematic analyses of transcripts show that participants broadly agreed on prioritized research themes in the following order: (1) the prevalence and burden of mental health and psychosocial difficulties in humanitarian settings, (2) how MHPSS implementation can be improved, (3) evaluation of specific MHPSS interventions, (4) the determinants of mental health and psychological distress, and (5) improved research methods and processes. Rather than differences in research themes across countries, what emerged was a disconnect between different groups of stakeholders regarding research processes: the perceived lack of translation of research findings into actual policy and programs; misunderstanding of research methods by aid workers; different appreciation of the time needed to conduct research; and disputed universality of research constructs. CONCLUSIONS: To advance a collaborative research agenda, actors in this field need to bridge the perceived disconnect between the goals of "relevance" and "excellence." Research needs to be more sensitive to questions and concerns arising from humanitarian interventions, and practitioners need to take research findings into account in designing interventions.

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 · 10.3109/10673229.2012.649113

Cites

38 of 38 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?

  • The assessment aimed to find a balance between relevance and excellence, by reaching data saturation and triangulating information.

    “the assessment aimed to find a balance between relevance (i.e., ensuring timely collection of information with an eye on intervention planning) and excellence (i.e., ensuring that collected information has sufficient reliability and validity, for example by reaching data saturation and triangulating information), while trying to reduce demand on time of the displaced population [33].”

    From Mental health and psychosocial support for South Sudanese refugees in northern Uganda: a needs and resource assessment (2016) · cites this paper as [33]

    The Results (Perceived Obstacles; page unavailable) define relevance as research useful for immediate solutions and excellence as scientific validity. The Discussion calls for bridging that gap, but the paper does not say that the assessment reached data saturation, triangulated information, or sought to reduce demands on displaced people's time. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Major barriers to providing evidence-based mental health programs in LMICs include lack of mental health specialists, disorder-specific treatment programs, and lengthy costly programs.

    “The major barriers to providing evidence-based mental health programs in LMICs include the lack of mental health specialists, most treatment programs being disorder-specific, which results in health providers needing to master multiple programs, and lengthy programs that are costly for health services and demanding on recipients [4].”

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tol, W. A., Patel, V., Tomlinson, M., Baingana, F., Galappatti, A., Silove, D., Sondorp, E., van Ommeren, M., Wessells, M. G., & Panter-Brick, C.
Affiliations
  • Yale University (US)
  • Stellenbosch University (ZA)
Corresponding author
Tol, Wietse A.
Venue
Harvard Review of Psychiatry
Published
2012-02-08
Volume
20
Issue
1
Pages
25-36
ISSN
1067-3229 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2146592762
Cited by
68
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 4
FWCI
12.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Harvard Review of Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • LSHTM Research Online (London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine) (acceptedVersion)
  • SUNScholar (Stellenbosch University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Wellcome Trust (091834)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health and Conflict Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Migration, Health and Trauma
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
Keywords
mental health and psychosocial support, humanitarian settings, research priorities, research agenda setting, stakeholder consensus, humanitarian crisis, psychological distress, determinants of mental health
MeSH terms
Altruism, Female, Health Services Research, Humans, Male, Mental Health, Mental Health Services, Nepal, Peru, Relief Work, Research, Research Design, Social Support, Uganda, Focus Groups

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