The COVID-19 pandemic has had negative consequences on the mental health of the population, which has been documented. Marginalised groups that are at risk of poor mental health overall have been particularly impacted. The purpose of this review is to describe the mental health impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on marginalised group (i.e. persons who are socio-economically disadvantaged, migrants and members of ethno-racial minorities, experience homelessness) and identified interventions which could be well-suited to prevent and address mental health difficulties. We conducted a literature review of systematic reviews on mental health difficulties since the beginning of the COVID-19 epidemic and appropriate interventions among marginalised groups published from January 1, 2020 to May 2, 2022, using Google Scholar and PubMed (MEDLINE). Among 792 studies on mental health difficulties among members of marginalised groups identified by keywords, 17 studies met our eligibility criteria. Twelve systematic reviews examining mental health difficulties in one or several marginalised groups during the COVID-19 pandemic and five systematic reviews on interventions that can mitigate the mental health impact of the COVID-19 pandemic were retained in our literature review. The mental health of marginalised groups was severely affected during the COVID-19 pandemic. Most frequently reported mental health difficulties included symptoms of anxiety and depression. Additionally, there are interventions that appear effective and well-suited for marginalised populations, which should be disseminated on a large scale to mitigate the psychiatric burden in these groups and at the population level.

The alcohol-attributable disease burden is greater in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) as compared to high-income countries. Despite the effectiveness of interventions such as health promotion and education, brief interventions, psychological treatments, family-focused interventions, and biomedical treatments, access to evidence-based care for alcohol use disorders (AUDs) in LMICs is limited. This can be explained by poor access to general health and mental health care, limited availability of relevant clinical skills among health care providers, lack of political will and/or financial resources, historical stigma and discrimination against people with AUDs, and poor planning and implementation of policies. Access to care for AUDs in LMICs could be improved through evidence-based strategies such as designing innovative, local and culturally acceptable solutions, health system strengthening by adopting a collaborative stepped care approach, horizontal integration of care into existing models of care (e.g., HIV care), task sharing to optimise limited human resources, working with families of individuals with AUD, and leveraging technology-enabled interventions. Moving ahead, research, policy and practice in LMICs need to focus on evidence-based decision-making, responsiveness to context and culture, working collaboratively with a range of stakeholders to design and implement interventions, identifying upstream social determinants of AUDs, developing and evaluating policy interventions such as increased taxation on alcohol, and developing services for special populations (e.g., adolescents) with AUDs.

With the launch of the Prisms Global Mental Health series, we are taking the opportunity to make explicit our vision for Global Mental Health. We strongly propose a Public Mental Health approach, incorporating culture and context and prioritizing equity and inclusion, particularly of previously marginalized groups. In using a Public Mental Health approach, we are framing Global Mental Health research as population-oriented research that seeks to understand the etiology, prevention, promotion, and treatment of mental and behavioral health problems with a strong emphasis on ‘knowledge generation’ which is relevant, transferable, and generalizable to different populations and settings. The public health approach also incorporates policy and systems research and evaluation, with a particular focus on accessibility and quality of care and human rights. By using the term Global, we are being explicit in acknowledging the role(s) of culture and context in all stages of research, from conceptualization through interpretation and dissemination. In centering equity and inclusion, we are advocating for a focus on populations who have been marginalized and have not been well represented within Global Mental Health research and active participation of voices of the populations that are included in the research. We are also working to promote participation of individuals from diverse and underrepresented communities and diverse experiences, including those with lived experience, in all stages of research pipeline: from conceptualization to publication of findings. Our readers will see these values and ideas operationalized in the choice of article topics and the published manuscripts as well as in the editorial and advisory board membership and selection of reviewers.

Refugees experience a greater rate of common mental disorders relative to most other populations, and there remains a need to address these needs. However, most refugees are hosted in low-and-middle-income countries, where there is a lack of resources and mental health providers who can deliver mainstream mental health services. This situation has led to the emergence of scalable mental health interventions that can deliver evidence-based programs to refugees in need. Many countries hosting refugees have implemented programs that train local lay providers in interventions that can be delivered at scale. This review provides a narrative overview of these scalable interventions and critiques the evidence for their efficacy. It is noted that there are limitations to currently available scalable interventions, and there is a need for greater attention to determining the longer-term benefits of interventions, addressing the mental health needs of refugees who do not respond to these interventions, assisting refugees with more severe psychological disorders, and understanding the specific mechanisms that underpin observed benefits of these interventions.

Body image concerns related to weight or other dimensions of appearance are now prevalent on a global scale. This paper reviews the theoretical frameworks that account for the global similarities and regional differences in rates and presentation of body image concerns, as well as reviewing the extant data. Given the harmful consequences of body image concerns in terms of mental and physical health, their global burden is high. Interventions to mitigate these concerns at the individual and systemic level are warranted.

Mental health expenditure accounts for just 2.1% of total domestic governmental health expenditure per capita. There is an economic, as well as moral, imperative to invest more in mental health given the long-term adverse impacts of mental disorders. This paper focuses on how economic evidence can be used to support the case for action on global mental health, focusing on refugees and people displaced due to conflict. Refugees present almost unique challenges as some policy makers may be reluctant to divert scarce resources away from the domestic population to these population groups. A rapid systematic scoping review was also undertaken to identify economic evaluations of mental health-related interventions for refugees and displaced people and to look at how this evidence base can be strengthened. Only 11 economic evaluations focused on the mental health of refugees, asylum seekers and other displaced people were identified. All but two of these intervention studies potentially could be cost-effective, but only five studies reported cost per quality-adjusted life year gained, a metric allowing the economic case for investment in refugee mental health to be compared with any other health-focused intervention. There is a need for more consistent collection of data on quality of life and the longer-term impacts of intervention. The perspective adopted in economic evaluations may also need broadening to include intersectoral benefits beyond health, as well as identifying complementary benefits to host communities. More use can be also made of modelling, drawing on existing evidence on the effectiveness and resource requirements of interventions delivered in comparable settings to expand the current evidence base. The budgetary impact of any proposed strategy should be considered; modelling could also be used to look at how implementation might be adapted to contain costs and take account of local contextual factors.

Integrating mental health care in primary healthcare settings is a compelling strategy to address the mental health treatment gap in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Collaborative Care is the integrated care model with the most evidence supporting its effectiveness, but most research has been conducted in high-income countries. Efforts to implement this complex multi-component model at scale in LMICs will be enhanced by understanding the model components that have been effective in LMIC settings. Following Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods Group recommendations, we conducted a rapid review to identify studies of the effectiveness of Collaborative Care for priority adult mental disorders of mhGAP (mood and anxiety disorders, psychosis, substance use disorders and epilepsy) in outpatient medical settings in LMICs. Article screening and data extraction were performed using Covidence software. Data extraction by two authors utilized a checklist of key components of effective interventions. Information was aggregated to examine how frequently the components were applied. Our search yielded 25 articles describing 20 Collaborative Care models that treated depression, anxiety, schizophrenia, alcohol use disorder or epilepsy in nine different LMICs. Fourteen of these models demonstrated statistically significantly improved clinical outcomes compared to comparison groups. Successful models shared key structural and process-of-care elements: a multi-disciplinary care team with structured communication; standardized protocols for evidence-based treatments; systematic identification of mental disorders, and a stepped-care approach to treatment intensification. There was substantial heterogeneity across studies with respect to the specifics of model components, and clear evidence of the importance of tailoring the model to the local context. This review provides evidence that Collaborative Care is effective across a range of mental disorders in LMICs. More work is needed to demonstrate population-level and longer-term outcomes, and to identify strategies that will support successful and sustained implementation in routine clinical settings.

Mental health policies and plans (MHPPs) are important policy instruments and powerful tools to facilitate development of mental health systems and services across the world. We aimed to map and analyse methods and tools used to assess the extent, process and impact of implementing MHPPs. We systematically searched peer-reviewed and grey literature across seven scientific databases. We extracted and analysed the data on a) the characteristics of included studies (e.g., policy areas, region of origin, income setting) and b) the methodology and evaluation tools applied to assess the extent and process of implementation. We included 48 studies in the analyses. Twenty-six of these studies employed only qualitative methods (e.g., semi-structured interviews, focus group discussions, desk review, stakeholder consultations); 12 studies used quantitative methods (e.g., trend analysis, survey) and 10 used mixed-methods approaches. Generally, methods and tools used for assessment were described poorly with less than half of the studies providing partial or full details about them. Only three studies provided assessment of full policies. There is a lack of rigorous research to assess implementation MHPPs. Assessments of the implementation of entire MHPPs are almost non-existent. Strategies to assess the implementation of MHPPs should be an integral part of MHPPs.

Mental health is inextricably linked to both poverty and future life chances such as education, skills, labour market attachment and social function. Poverty can lead to poorer mental health, which reduces opportunities and increases the risk of lifetime poverty. Cash transfer programmes are one of the most common strategies to reduce poverty and now reach substantial proportions of populations living in low- and middle-income countries. Because of their rapid expansion in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, they have recently gained even more importance. Recently, there have been suggestions that these cash transfers might improve youth mental health, disrupting the cycle of disadvantage at a critical period of life. Here, we present a conceptual framework describing potential mechanisms by which cash transfer programmes could improve the mental health and life chances of young people. Furthermore, we explore how theories from behavioural economics and cognitive psychology could be used to more specifically target these mechanisms and optimise the impact of cash transfers on youth mental health and life chances. Based on this, we identify several lines of enquiry and action for future research and policy.

It is crucial to optimize global mental health research to address the high burden of mental health challenges and mental illness for individuals and societies. Data sharing and reuse have demonstrated value for advancing science and accelerating knowledge development. The FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable) Guiding Principles for scientific data provide a framework to improve the transparency, efficiency, and impact of research. In this review, we describe ethical and equity considerations in data sharing and reuse, delineate the FAIR principles as they apply to mental health research, and consider the current state of FAIR data practices in global mental health research, identifying challenges and opportunities. We describe noteworthy examples of collaborative efforts, often across disciplinary and national boundaries, to improve Findability and Accessibility of global mental health data, as well as efforts to create integrated data resources and tools that improve Interoperability and Reusability. Based on this review, we suggest a vision for the future of FAIR global mental health research and suggest practical steps for researchers with regard to study planning, data preservation and indexing, machine-actionable metadata, data reuse to advance science and improve equity, metrics and recognition.

This paper proposes a framework for comprehensive, collaborative, and community-based care (C4) for accessible mental health services in low-resource settings. Because mental health conditions have many causes, this framework includes social, public health, wellness and clinical services. It accommodates integration of stand-alone mental health programs with health and non-health community-based services. It addresses gaps in previous models including lack of community-based psychotherapeutic and social services, difficulty in addressing comorbidity of mental and physical conditions, and how workers interact with respect to referral and coordination of care. The framework is based on task-shifting of services to non-specialized workers. While the framework draws on the World Health Organization’s Mental Health Gap Action Program and other global mental health models, there are important differences. The C4 Framework delineates types of workers based on their skills. Separate workers focus on: basic psychoeducation and information sharing; community-level, evidence-based psychotherapeutic counseling; and primary medical care and more advanced, specialized mental health services for more severe or complex cases. This paper is intended for individuals, organizations and governments interested in implementing mental health services. The primary aim is to provide a framework for the provision of widely accessible mental health care and services.

In recent years, the reality of global migration has brought the lack of understanding of mental health needs across different cultures into sharp focus. Psychology programs are not up to date on global issues and are often experienced as inadequate in preparing graduates to meet the challenges of society today. The field of education and training in psychology has hardly evolved since the last two decades. On the other hand, the mental health needs arising locally and globally require a knowledge base and a set of skills future psychologists need to have in order to be able to work and grow professionally. In addition, most psychologists in the western world are bound, at some point in their career, to be in contact with immigrants or refugees to offer them services and be a source of support for such a vulnerable population. Also, the field of psychology is witnessing more movement among psychologists than ever before, whereby many professionals move to another country, to work, volunteer, gain or provide training, consult and much more. This requires a certain level of preparation, which psychologists need to be aware of and ready to engage in before and after they move. This article highlights different psychology programs around the world that include global mental health in their programs. It discusses essential aspects and skills that psychologists need to learn to be prepared to work globally with various populations and to expand their skills beyond service providing to more management and policy work. Topics such as human rights and social justice, advocacy, health management and policymaking are addressed as important competencies to be gained during the education and training of future psychologists.

The return from maternity leave to work is a critical career transition period for working mothers. To help their readaptation to work, we developed and examined a training program for cultivating their work–family balance self-efficacy in a pretest–posttest design and investigated the time-lagged effect of the boosted self-efficacy on their employment attitude and in-role performance after they returned to work. Data were collected from 100 maternity leave takers from 16 companies in Japan before the training (Time 1), immediately after it (Time 2) and 6 months after returning to work (Time 3), and from their supervisors at Time 3. We found that maternity leave takers displayed an increase in work–life balance self-efficacy after the training. We also found that work–life balance self-efficacy after the training (Time 2) predicted the participants’ in-role performance (Time 3) reported by their supervisors, but not employment attitude reported by the participants (Time 3). Our study thus offers preliminary evidence supporting the effectiveness of the training program in helping maternity leave takers’ readaptation to work, potentially supplementing existing family-friendly policies.