Mapping the global mental health research funding system

Pollitt, Alexandra; Cochrane, Gavin; Kirtley, Anne; Krapels, Joachim; Larivière, Vincent; Lichten, Catherine A.; Parks, Sarah; Wooding, Steven

doi:10.7249/rr1271

Cited by 11 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 10 publications

(12 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A rapid review8 on actors in global mental health, emphasises the prominence of donor states and identifies some non-state donors, such as philanthropists, private-sector foundations, and organisations using innovative financing mechanisms. Another study9 mapping the ecosystem of global mental health research funders includes some actors disbursing to LMICs, such as Wellcome Trust and Grand Challenges Canada.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sustainable development for global mental health: a typology and systematic evidence mapping of external actors in low-income and middle-income countries

Iemmi

2019

BMJ Glob Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionMental disorders account for a substantial burden of disease and costs in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs), but attract few resources. With LMIC governments often under economic pressure, an understanding of the external funding landscape is urgently needed. This study develops a new typology of external actors in global health adapted for the sustainable development goals (SDGs) era and uses it to systematically map available evidence on external actors in global mental health.MethodsThe new typology was developed in line with conceptualisation in the literature and the SDGs to include 11 types of external actors for health in LMICs. Five databases (EconLit, Embase, Global Health, MEDLINE, PsycINFO) were searched for manuscripts published in peer-reviewed journals in English, French, Italian, Portuguese or Spanish between 1 January 2000 and 31 July 2018 and reporting information on external actors for mental disorders in LMICs. Records were screened by abstract, then full-text against inclusion criteria. Data were extracted and synthesised using narrative analysis.Results79 studies were included in the final review. Five were quantitative studies analysing the resource flow of development assistance for mental health globally over the last two decades. The remainder were qualitative studies providing a description of external actors: the majority of them were published in the last decade, focused on Africa, and on public sector (bilateral and multilateral governmental organisations) and third sector organisations (non-governmental organisations). Evidence was particularly scarce for for-profit organisations and individual households.ConclusionThis study reveals opportunities for unlocking additional funding for global mental health in the SDG-era from an ecosystem of external actors, and highlights the need to coordinate efforts and to use sustainable, ethical approaches to disbursements. Further research is needed to understand all external actors and the allocation of their contributions in different settings.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sustainable development for global mental health: a typology and systematic evidence mapping of external actors in low-income and middle-income countries

Iemmi

2019

BMJ Glob Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…1,420 papers contain FBAs with an average of 2.98 acknowledgements per paper. This represents 15% of the dataset, which is lower than other studies 12 but may reflect the fact that 67% of the papers in the dataset were published before 2008 – the year WoS began collecting data on FBAs.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 87%

“…The second level of analysis was to assess the distribution and co-occurrence of recorded funding body acknowledgements (FBAs) from publications cited in the guidelines. This bottom-up approach has been used in various studies to map the funding landscape of a particular field, explore interactions among research funders and assess trends in research funding 9 – 12 .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding the contribution of UK public health research to clinical guidelines: a bibliometric analysis

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is an increasing need to understand the wider impacts Background: of research on society and the economy. For health research, a key focus is understanding the impact of research on practice and ultimately on patient outcomes. This can be challenging to measure, but one useful proxy for changes in practice is impact on guidelines.The aim of this study is to map the contribution of UK research Methods: and UK research funders to the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) public health guidelines, understanding areas of strengths and weakness and the level of collaboration and coordination across countries and between funders. The work consisted of two main elements: analysis of the references cited on NICE guidelines and interviews with experts in public health.Across the papers cited on 62 NICE public health guidelines, we Results: find that 28% of the papers matched include at least one UK affiliation, which is relatively high when compared to other health fields. In total, 165 unique funders were identified with more than three acknowledgements, based in 20 countries. 68% of papers which acknowledge funding cite at least one UK funder, and NIHR is the most highly cited funder in the sample.The UK makes an important contribution to public health Conclusions: research cited on NICE PH guidelines, although the research does not appear to be bibliometrically distinct from other research sectors, other than having a relatively low level of international collaboration. However, the extent to which NICE public health guidelines reflect practice at the local authority level is less clear. More research is needed to understand the sources of evidence to support public health decision making at the local level and how NICE guidance can be made more applicable, timely and accessible in this new context.

show abstract

“…See Pollitt et al (2016). Table 7, which adopts a simplified version of the classification system for outputs used by UNU-WIDER.…”

Section: Publicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Review of Six DFID-funded Growth Research Programmes: Main report

Krapels¹,

Cochrane²,

Taylor³

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mapping the global mental health research funding system

Cited by 11 publications

References 10 publications

Sustainable development for global mental health: a typology and systematic evidence mapping of external actors in low-income and middle-income countries

Sustainable development for global mental health: a typology and systematic evidence mapping of external actors in low-income and middle-income countries

Understanding the contribution of UK public health research to clinical guidelines: a bibliometric analysis

Review of Six DFID-funded Growth Research Programmes: Main report

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About