BACKGROUND: Households with a disabled member, be they a caregiver or a child, are poorer than households not affected by disability. Poverty, caregiving as a person with a disability and being the caregiver of a child with a disability can lead to increased parenting stress OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to examine whether parenting stress experienced by caregivers in a household with a disabled member is greater when the disabled member is the caregiver, or the child, and how much of these respective relationships is explained by poverty. METHOD: We collected cross-sectional data using a demographic survey, the Washington Group Questions on adult disability, the 10 Questions on child disability and the Parenting Stress Index-Short Form, from 465 caregivers enrolled in a non-governmental child development programme in Kenya. RESULTS: Households with a disabled member were poorer than households without a disabled member. Parenting stress of disabled caregivers was higher than parenting stress of non-disabled caregivers; however, this relationship disappeared when socio-economic status was controlled for. Caregivers of disabled children were more stressed than caregivers of non-disabled children, and this effect was not explained by differences in socio-economic status. CONCLUSION: Our findings highlight the importance of developing a comprehensive understanding of the stressors facing households with a disabled member, particularly if that member is a child, so that supportive interventions can adequately cater to the needs of caregivers, and their children, in the context of poverty.

Globally, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are increasingly seen as the gold standard of programme evaluation, representing the best way to determine whether new interventions are effective - but they are not without limitations. In this article, we discuss the phases of scientific discovery and the research standards that are necessary before scaling up interventions. We also outline the core characteristics of RCTs, such as randomisation, efficacy and effectiveness, and discuss the benefits of using the RCT as the standard of intervention evaluation. We discuss how 'realist' evaluation contributes to what policymakers need to know in order to make a decision about an evaluation and alternatives to the RCT, such as stepped wedge, regression discontinuity, non-randomised cohort, and time series designs.

High levels of violence affect every family in South Africa. Exposure to violence starts early, in both the home and community. There are high levels of physical abuse of children,¹ and the national under-five homicide rate is more than double that of other low- and middle-income countries.² Rates of violence are particularly high in poorer communities in the country, and many children already made vulnerable by poverty are also at risk from increased exposure to violence.³

INTRODUÇÃO: O principal objetivo desse estudo foi revisar a agenda de prioridades em pesquisa em saúde mental no Brasil. MÉTODO: Foram selecionados 28 especialistas (22 pesquisadores, cinco legisladores e o coordenador) de diferentes regiões. Responderam ao que consideravam mais relevante em pesquisa para a saúde mental para os próximos 10 anos. Dezessete responderam e configuraram 110 questões, que foram reavaliadas por eles, com atribuição de escore, a partir de 15 itens distribuídos segundo grau de responsividade, eficácia, aplicabilidade, equidade e impacto na redução da carga da doença mental. 35 questões, e dentre elas as 10 mais bem pontuadas, foram destacadas. RESULTADOS: Prevaleceram indicações para estudos de efetividade das intervenções, matriciamento, comparação entre modelos de intervenção e detecção e tratamento de transtornos mais prevalentes na Estratégia da Saúde da Família. Avaliação de serviços quanto às barreiras ao tratamento; custo-efetividade dos antipsicóticos, intervenções contra efeitos do álcool e outras drogas, e aplicação de tecnologias (telemedicina) para educação e supervisão dos generalistas foram outros. CONCLUSÃO: Apontou-se para necessidade de investimentos na saúde mental na atenção primária à saúde; avaliação do sistema de serviços de cuidados de saúde mental, e pesquisas para romper barreiras ao acesso e à equidade no tratamento dos transtornos mentais.

BACKGROUND: The main aim of this study is to review the agenda for research priorities of mental health in Brazil. METHODOLOGY: The first step was to gather 28 experts (22 researchers, five policy makers, and the coordinator) representing all mental health fields from different geographical areas of the country. Participants were asked to list what they considered to be the most relevant mental health research questions for the country to address in the next 10 years. Seventeen participants answered this question; after redundancies were excluded, a total of 110 responses were collected. As the second step, participants were asked to rank which questions were the 35 most significant. The final step was to score 15 items for each of the 35 selected questions to determine whether it would be a) answerable, b) effective, c) deliverable, d) equitable, and e) effective at reducing the burden of mental health. The ten highest ranked questions were then selected. RESULTS: There were four questions addressing primary care with respect to a) the effectiveness of interventions, b) "matrix support", c) comparisons of different models of stepped care, and d) interventions to enhance identification and treatment of common mental disorders at the Family Health Program. The other questions were related to the evaluation of mental health services for adults and children/adolescents to clarify barriers to treatment in primary care, drug addiction, and severe mental disorders; to investigate the cost-benefit relationship of anti-psychotics; to design interventions to decrease alcohol consumption; and to apply new technologies (telemedicine) for education and supervision of non-specialists. CONCLUSION: This priority-setting research exercise highlighted a need for implementing investments at the primary-care level, particularly in the family health program; the urgent need to evaluate services; and policies to improve equity by increasing accessibility to services and testing interventions to reduce barriers for seeking mental health treatment.

OBJECTIVE: To set investment priorities in global mental health research and to propose a more rational use of funds in this under-resourced and under-investigated area. METHODS: Members of the Lancet Mental Health Group systematically listed and scored research investment options on four broad classes of disorders: schizophrenia and other major psychotic disorders, major depressive disorder and other common mental disorders, alcohol abuse and other substance abuse disorders, and the broad class of child and adolescent mental disorders. Using the priority-setting approach of the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative, the group listed various research questions and evaluated them using the criteria of answerability, effectiveness, deliverability, equity and potential impact on persisting burden of mental health disorders. Scores were then weighted according to the system of values expressed by a larger group of stakeholders. FINDINGS: The research questions that scored highest were related to health policy and systems research, where and how to deliver existing cost-effective interventions in a low-resource context, and epidemiological research on the broad categories of child and adolescent mental disorders or those pertaining to alcohol and drug abuse questions. The questions that scored lowest related to the development of new interventions and new drugs or pharmacological agents, vaccines or other technologies. CONCLUSION: In the context of global mental health and with a time frame of the next 10 years, it would be best to fill critical knowledge gaps by investing in research into health policy and systems, epidemiology and improved delivery of cost-effective interventions.

OBJETIVO: Establecer las prioridades de inversión en investigaciones mundiales sobre salud mental y proponer un uso más racional de los fondos en este campo subfinanciado e insuficientemente investigado. MÉTODOS: Miembros del Grupo de Salud Mental Lancet procedieron a enumerar y puntuar sistemáticamente las opciones de inversión en la investigación de cuatro amplias categorías de dolencias: esquizofrenia y otros trastornos psicóticos graves, depresión mayor y otros trastornos mentales comunes, abuso de alcohol y otros trastornos por abuso de sustancias, y la gran variedad de trastornos mentales en niños y adolescentes. Aplicando el criterio de fijación de prioridades de la Iniciativa de Salud del Niño e Investigación Nutricional, el grupo confeccionó una lista de diversos temas de investigación y los evaluó conforme a los criterios de justificación, eficacia, viabilidad, equidad e impacto potencial en la carga persistente de trastornos de salud mental. Las puntuaciones se ponderaron luego de acuerdo con el sistema de valores expresado por un grupo más amplio de interesados directos. RESULTADOS: Los temas de investigación que obtuvieron una mayor puntuación guardan relación con la investigación de políticas y sistemas de salud, la determinación de dónde y cómo aplicar intervenciones costoeficaces ya existentes en un contexto de pocos recursos, y la investigación epidemiológica relacionada con las categorías generales de trastornos mentales de niños y adolescentes o con aspectos del abuso de alcohol y drogas. Los temas con menor puntuación fueron los relacionados con el desarrollo de nuevas intervenciones y nuevos medicamentos o agentes farmacológicos, vacunas y otras tecnologías. CONCLUSIÓN: En el contexto de la salud mental mundial y dentro del horizonte de los próximos 10 años, lo más conveniente sería llenar algunos vacíos de vital importancia en los actuales conocimientos invirtiendo en la investigación de las políticas y los sistemas de salud, la epidemiología y la mejora de la aplicación de intervenciones costoeficaces.

OBJECTIF: Fixer des priorités en matière d'investissement dans la recherche mondiale en santé mentale et proposer un usage plus rationnel des fonds dans ce domaine, qui demeure sous-financé et sous-étudié. MÉTHODES: Les Membres du Lancet Mental Health Group ont recensé systématiquement et attribué un score aux options d'investissement dans des recherches concernant quatre classes de troubles : schizophrénie et autres troubles psychotiques majeurs, troubles dépressifs majeurs et autres troubles mentaux courants, abus d'alcool et autres troubles dus à l'abus de substance et troubles de l'enfant et de l'adolescent (classe large). En appliquant la démarche de fixation des priorités de la Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative, le Groupe a listé diverses questions à étudier et les a évaluées selon des critères de résolubilité, d'efficacité, d'aptitude à donner des résultats délivrables, d'équité et d'impact sur la charge persistante de troubles mentaux. Ces scores ont ensuite été pondérés selon le système de valeurs énoncé par un groupe plus important de parties concernées. RÉSULTATS: Les questions à étudier obtenant le score le plus élevé concernaient la recherche sur les politiques et les systèmes de santé, les lieux et les modalités de délivrance des interventions d'un bon rapport coût/efficacité dans les pays à faibles ressources, les recherches épidémiologiques sur la catégorie large des troubles de l'enfant et de l'adolescent et les questions relatives à l'abus d'alcool et de drogues. Les questions obtenant le score le plus bas concernaient le développement de nouvelles interventions, de nouveaux médicaments, agents pharmacologiques et vaccins et d'autres technologies. CONCLUSION: Dans le contexte de la santé mentale et à l'horizon des dix prochaines années, il serait préférable de combler les lacunes les plus criantes en matière de connaissances en investissant dans la recherche sur les politiques et les systèmes de santé, l'épidémiologie et l'amélioration de la délivrance des interventions d'un bon rapport coût/efficacité.

BACKGROUND: Mental disorders are a major contributor to the burden of disease in all regions of the world. There are limited data on the epidemiology of major depressive disorder in South Africa. METHODS: A nationally representative household survey was conducted between 2002 and 2004 using the World Health Organization Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI) to establish a diagnosis of depression. The dataset analysed included 4 351 adult South Africans of all racial groups. RESULTS: The prevalence of major depression was 9.7% for lifetime and 4.9% for the 12 months prior to the interview. The prevalence of depression was significantly higher among females than among males. The prevalence was also higher among those with a low level of education. Over 90% of all respondents with depression reported global role impairment. CONCLUSION: In comparison with data from other countries, South Africa has lower rates of depression than the USA but higher rates than Nigeria. The findings are broadly consistent with previous findings in South Africa. These findings are the first step in documenting a level of need for care in a context of significant under-funding of mental health services and research in South Africa.