↓ Skip to main content

Public Mental Health – Using the Mental Health Gap Action Program to Put all Hands to the Pumps

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Public Health, April 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
83 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Public Mental Health – Using the Mental Health Gap Action Program to Put all Hands to the Pumps
Published in
Frontiers in Public Health, April 2014
DOI 10.3389/fpubh.2014.00033
Pubmed ID
Authors

Richard Uwakwe, Alex Otakpor

Abstract

Although mental ill health constitutes a huge portion of the Global Burden of Disease (GBD), the majority of people with mental health problems do not receive any treatment, a scenario much worse in developing countries where mental health personnel are in gross short supply. The mhGAP was launched to address this gap, especially by training non-mental health professionals to deliver effective services for selected priority mental health problems. Especially in developing countries, many people with mental health problems consult traditional healers either as a first step in the pathway to biomedical mental health care or as the sole mental health service providers. Bridging the gap between mental health needs and available services in developing countries needs to incorporate traditional healers, who are ubiquitously available, easily accessible, and acceptable to the natives. Even though there are barriers in forging collaborations between traditional and biomedical mental health care providers, with mutual respect, understanding, and adapted training using the mhGAP intervention guide, it should be possible to get some traditional healers to understand the core principles of some priority mental health problems identification, treatment, and referral.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Nigeria 1 1%
Unknown 82 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 12%
Student > Bachelor 10 12%
Student > Postgraduate 8 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 7%
Researcher 5 6%
Other 16 19%
Unknown 28 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 19%
Psychology 13 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 8%
Social Sciences 5 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 7 8%
Unknown 33 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 19 August 2017.
All research outputs
#14,195,272
of 22,754,104 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Public Health
#3,497
of 9,787 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,335
of 226,936 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Public Health
#17
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,754,104 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,787 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 226,936 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.