No abstract

Summaryobjectives To examine the impact of antenatal psychosocial stressors, including maternal common mental disorders (CMD), upon low birth weight, stillbirth and neonatal mortality, and other perinatal outcomes in rural Ethiopia.methods A population-based sample of 1065 pregnant women was assessed for symptoms of antenatal CMD (Self-Reporting Questionnaire-20: SRQ-20), stressful life events during pregnancy (List of Threatening Experiences: LTE) and worry about the forthcoming delivery. In a sub-sample of 654 women from six rural sub-districts, neonatal birth weight was measured on 521 (79.7%) singleton babies within 48 h of delivery. Information about other perinatal outcomes was obtained shortly after birth from the mother's verbal report and via the Demographic Surveillance System.results After adjusting for potential confounders, none of the psychosocial stressors were associated with lower mean birth weight, stillbirth or neonatal mortality. Increasing levels of antenatal CMD symptoms were associated both with prolonged labour (>24 h) (SRQ 1-5: RR 1.4; 95% CI 1.0-1.9, SRQ ‡ 6: RR 1.6; 95% CI 1.0-2.6) and delaying initiation of breast-feeding more than eight hours (SRQ 1-5: RR 1.4; 95% CI 0.8 to 2.4, SRQ ‡ 6: RR 2.8; 95% CI 1.3-6

No abstract

A house‐to‐house survey was carried out in a rural Ethiopian community to determine the prevalence and socio‐demographic correlates of khat use. A total of 10 468 adults were interviewed. Of these, 58% were female, and 740/0 were Muslim. More than half of the study population (55.7%) reported lifetime khat chewing experience and the prevalence of current use was 50%. Among current chewers, 17.40/0 reported taking khat on a daily basis; 16.1% of these were male and 3.4% were female. Various reasons were given for chewing khat; 80% of the chewers used it to gain a good level of concentration for prayer. Muslim religion, smoking and high educational level showed strong association with daily khat chewing.

Stigma was found to be a common problem, with few differences between socio-demographic groups or between types of mental disorder. Beliefs about causes differ from those held by professionals. Popular beliefs and attitudes must be taken into account when planning for intervention.

BackgroundCollaborations are often a cornerstone of global health research. Power dynamics can shape if and how local researchers are included in manuscripts. This article investigates how international collaborations affect the representation of local authors, overall and in first and last author positions, in African health research.MethodsWe extracted papers on ‘health’ in sub-Saharan Africa indexed in PubMed and published between 2014 and 2016. The author’s affiliation was used to classify the individual as from the country of the paper’s focus, from another African country, from Europe, from the USA/Canada or from another locale. Authors classified as from the USA/Canada were further subclassified if the author was from a top US university. In primary analyses, individuals with multiple affiliations were presumed to be from a high-income country if they contained any affiliation from a high-income country. In sensitivity analyses, these individuals were presumed to be from an African country if they contained any affiliation an African country. Differences in paper characteristics and representation of local coauthors are compared by collaborative type using χ² tests.ResultsOf the 7100 articles identified, 68.3% included collaborators from the USA, Canada, Europe and/or another African country. 54.0% of all 43 429 authors and 52.9% of 7100 first authors were from the country of the paper’s focus. Representation dropped if any collaborators were from USA, Canada or Europe with the lowest representation for collaborators from top US universities—for these papers, 41.3% of all authors and 23.0% of first authors were from country of paper’s focus. Local representation was highest with collaborators from another African country. 13.5% of all papers had no local coauthors.DiscussionIndividuals, institutions and funders from high-income countries should challenge persistent power differentials in global health research. South-South collaborations can help African researchers expand technical expertise while maintaining presence on the resulting research.

No abstract

There is a large treatment gap for mental health care in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), with the majority of people with mental, neurological, and substance use (MNS) disorders receiving no or inadequate care. Health system factors are known to play a crucial role in determining the coverage and effectiveness of health service interventions, but the study of mental health systems in LMICs has been neglected. The ‘Emerging mental health systems in LMICs’ (Emerald) programme aims to improve outcomes of people with MNS disorders in six LMICs (Ethiopia, India, Nepal, Nigeria, South Africa, and Uganda) by generating evidence and capacity to enhance health system performance in delivering mental health care. A mixed-methods approach is being applied to generate evidence on: adequate, fair, and sustainable resourcing for mental health (health system inputs); integrated provision of mental health services (health system processes); and improved coverage and goal attainment in mental health (health system outputs). Emerald has a strong focus on capacity-building of researchers, policymakers, and planners, and on increasing service user and caregiver involvement to support mental health systems strengthening. Emerald also addresses stigma and discrimination as one of the key barriers for access to and successful delivery of mental health services.