BackgroundSocial support (SS) has been identified as an essential buffer to stressful life events. Consequently, there has been a surge in the evaluation of SS as a wellbeing indicator. The Multidimensional Perceived Social Support Scale (MSPSS) has evolved as one of the most extensively translated and validated social support outcome measures. Due to linguistic and cultural differences, there is need to test the psychometrics of the adapted versions. However, there is a paucity of systematic evidence of the psychometrics of adapted and translated versions of the MSPSS across settings.ObjectivesTo understand the psychometric properties of the MSPSS for non-English speaking populations by conducting a systematic review of studies that examine the psychometric properties of non-English versions of the MSPSS.MethodsWe searched Africa-Wide Information, CINAHL, Medline and PsycINFO, for articles published in English on the translation and or validation of the MSPSS. Methodological quality and quality of psychometric properties of the retrieved translations were assessed using the COSMIN checklist and a validated quality assessment criterion, respectively. The two assessments were combined to produce the best level of evidence per language/translation.ResultsSeventy articles evaluating the MSPSS in 22 languages were retrieved. Most translations [16/22] were not rigorously translated (only solitary backward-forward translations were performed, reconciliation was poorly described, or were not pretested). There was poor evidence for structural validity, as confirmatory factor analysis was performed in only nine studies. Internal consistency was reported in all studies. Most attained a Cronbach’s alpha of at least 0.70 against a backdrop of fair methodological quality. There was poor evidence for construct validity.ConclusionThere is limited evidence supporting the psychometric robustness of the translated versions of the MSPSS, and given the variability, the individual psychometrics of a translation must be considered prior to use. Responsiveness, measurement error and cut-off values should also be assessed to increase the clinical utility and psychometric robustness of the translated versions of the MSPSS.Trial registrationPROSPERO - CRD42016052394.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12955-018-0912-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
BACKGROUND: As the US transitions to value-based healthcare, physicians and payers are incentivized to change healthcare delivery to improve quality of care while controlling costs. By assisting with the management of common chronic conditions, community health workers (CHWs) may improve healthcare quality, but physicians and payers who are making choices about care delivery also need to understand their effects on healthcare spending. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PsycINFO, Embase, and Web of Science from the inception of each database to 22 June 2015. We included US-based studies that evaluated a CHW intervention for patients with at least one chronic health condition and reported cost or healthcare utilization outcomes. We evaluated studies using tools specific to study design. RESULTS: Our search yielded 2,941 studies after removing duplicates. Thirty-four met inclusion and methodological criteria. Sixteen studies (47%) were randomized controlled trials (RCTs). RCTs typically had less positive outcomes than other study designs. Of the 16 RCTs, 12 reported utilization outcomes, of which 5 showed a significant reduction in one or more of ED visits, hospitalizations and/or urgent care visits. Significant reductions reported in ED visits ranged from 23%-51% and in hospitalizations ranged from 21%-50%, and the one significant reduction in urgent care visits was recorded at 60% (p < 0.05 for all). DISCUSSION: Our results suggest that CHW interventions have variable effects, but some may reduce costs and preventable utilization. These findings suggest that it is possible to achieve reductions in care utilization and cost savings by integrating CHWs into chronic care management. However, variations in cost and utilization outcomes suggest that CHWs alone do not make an intervention successful. The paucity of rigorous studies and heterogeneity of study designs limited conclusions about factors associated with reduced utilization.
Background. Capacity building is essential in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) to address the gap in skills to conduct and implement research. Capacity building must not only include scientific and technical knowledge, but also broader competencies, such as writing, disseminating research and achieving work–life balance. These skills are thought to promote long-term career success for researchers in high-income countries (HICs) but the availability of such training is limited in LMICs. Methods. This paper presents the contextualisation and implementation of the Academic Competencies Series (ACES). ACES is an early-career researcher development programme adapted from a UK university. Through consultation between HIC and LMIC partners, an innovative series of 10 workshops was designed covering themes of self-development, engagement and writing skills. ACES formed part of the African Mental Health Research Initiative (AMARI), a multi-national LMIC-led consortium to recruit, train, support and network early-career mental health researchers from four sub-Saharan African countries. Results. Of the 10 ACES modules, three were HIC-LMIC co-led, four led by HIC facilitators with LMIC training experience and three led by external consultants from HICs. Six workshops were delivered face to face and four by webinar. Course attendance was over 90% and the delivery cost was approximately US$4500 per researcher trained. Challenges of adaptation, attendance and technical issues are described for the first round of workshops. Conclusions. This paper indicates that a skills development series for early-career researchers can be contextualised and implemented in LMIC settings, and is feasible for co-delivery with local partners at relatively low cost.
IntroductionThe lack of trained mental health workers is a primary contributor to the mental health treatment gap worldwide. Despite the great need to recruit and retain mental health workers in low-income countries, little is known about how these workers perceive their jobs and what drives them to work in mental health care. Using qualitative interviews, we aimed to explore factors motivating mental health workers in order to inform interventions to increase recruitment and retention.MethodsWe conducted 28 in-depth, open-ended interviews with staff in Ghana’s three public psychiatric hospitals. We used the snowballing method to recruit participants and the constant comparative method for qualitative data analysis, with multiple members of the research team participating in data coding to enhance the validity and reliability of the analysis. The use of qualitative methods allowed us to understand the range and depth of motivating and demotivating factors.ResultsRespondents described many factors that influenced their choice to enter and remain in mental health care. Motivating factors included 1) desire to help patients who are vulnerable and in need, 2) positive day-to-day interactions with patients, 3) intellectual or academic interest in psychiatry or behavior, and 4) good relationships with colleagues. Demotivating factors included 1) lack of resources at the hospital, 2) a rigid supervisory hierarchy, 3) lack of positive or negative feedback on work performance, and 4) few opportunities for career advancement within mental health.ConclusionsBecause many of the factors are related to relationships, these findings suggest that strengthening the interpersonal and team dynamics may be a critical and relatively low cost way to increase worker motivation. The data also allowed us to highlight key areas for resource allocation to improve both recruitment and retention, including risk pay, adequate tools for patient care, improved hospital work environment, and stigma reduction efforts.
These findings shed light on RCs in primary care. Many patients and coaches perceived that RCs play a valuable role within primary care, providing both tangible system navigation and intangible, social support that promote recovery and might not otherwise be available. Enhanced communication between RCs and health center leadership in defining the RC role may help resolve ambiguity and related tensions between RCs and care team members.
BackgroundNearly one in three South Africans will suffer from a mental disorder in his or her lifetime, a higher prevalence than many low- and middle-income countries. Understanding the economic costs and consequences of prevention and packages of care is essential, particularly as South Africa considers scaling-up mental health services and works towards universal health coverage. Economic evaluations can inform how priorities are set in system or spending changes.ObjectiveTo identify and review research from South Africa and sub-Saharan Africa on the direct and indirect costs of mental, neurological, and substance use (MNS) disorders and the cost-effectiveness of treatment interventions.DesignNarrative overview methodology.Results and conclusionsReviewed studies indicate that integrating mental health care into existing health systems may be the most effective and cost-efficient approach to increase access to mental health services in South Africa. Integration would also direct treatment, prevention, and screening to people with HIV and other chronic health conditions who are at high risk for mental disorders. We identify four major knowledge gaps: 1) accurate and thorough assessment of the health burdens of MNS disorders, 2) design and assessment of interventions that integrate mental health screening and treatment into existing health systems, 3) information on the use and costs of traditional medicines, and 4) cost-effectiveness evaluation of a range of specific interventions or packages of interventions that are tailored to the national context.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.