↓ Skip to main content

A structured approach to integrating mental health services into primary care: development of the Mental Health Scale Up Nigeria intervention (mhSUN)

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Mental Health Systems, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
11 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
124 Mendeley
Title
A structured approach to integrating mental health services into primary care: development of the Mental Health Scale Up Nigeria intervention (mhSUN)
Published in
International Journal of Mental Health Systems, March 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13033-018-0188-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Julian Eaton, Oye Gureje, Mary De Silva, Taiwo Lateef Sheikh, Ekpe Esien Ekpe, Mohammed Abdulaziz, Asiya Muhammad, Yusuf Akande, Uchechi Onukogu, Theo Onyuku, Jibril Abdulmalik, Woye Fadahunsi, Emeka Nwefoh, Alex Cohen

Abstract

The treatment gap for mental illness in Nigeria, as in other sub-Saharan countries, is estimated to be around 85%. There is need to prioritise mental health care in low and middle income countries by providing a strong body of evidence for effective services, particularly with a view to increasing international and government confidence in investment in scaling up appropriate services. This paper lays out the processes by which a programme to integrate evidence-based mental health care into primary care services in Nigeria was designed, including a research framework to provide evidence from a robust evaluation. This paper forms the first step in the overall process evaluation of the mhSUN intervention, where standard research practice indicates that the intervention, and its development, is clearly documented prior to subsequent evaluation. The report covers the period of programme development and evaluation design, and study site and design was chosen to allow generalisability and practical conclusions to be drawn for service development in Nigeria. In order to design an intervention that was informed by evidence and took into account local context and input of stakeholders, a structured process was followed, including: (1) Engagement of relevant stakeholders for information gathering and buy-in; (2) Literature review and gathering of pertinent evidence; (3) Situation analysis at a national and local level; (4) Model development (using Theory of Change); (5) Ongoing consultation, recognising the iterative nature of Theory of Change, and need for ongoing refinement of complex interventions. The different sections of the structured approach resulted in outputs that built the necessary components (literature review, situation analysis) for informing the Theory of Change. A Theory of Change map is presented, which includes transparent documentation of the assumptions and logic behind the activities to drive the desired change. In addition, it documents the indicators necessary to measure fidelity and draw conclusions as to hypothesised effects of different mechanisms of action in subsequent evaluation. In addition to the details of ensuring robust evaluation design, there are a number of considerations that are particular to the context that must be taken into account in programme development, including the relationships between ultimate beneficiaries, implementers, host government and institutions, donors, and programme evaluators. Structured methods from existing frameworks can be drawn upon to use and collate relevant information to maximise the local applicability of a generic evidence base. Theory of Change, with its documented assumptions can form the basis of subsequent evaluation and iterative programme refinement, contributing to a more scientifically valid means of developing mental health programmes for scale up.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 124 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 124 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 16%
Researcher 16 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 13%
Student > Bachelor 11 9%
Student > Postgraduate 11 9%
Other 16 13%
Unknown 34 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 16%
Psychology 18 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 9%
Social Sciences 10 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 4%
Other 17 14%
Unknown 43 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 May 2023.
All research outputs
#1,920,833
of 25,381,151 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Mental Health Systems
#79
of 759 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,126
of 336,282 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Mental Health Systems
#4
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,381,151 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 759 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 336,282 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.