HOPE (National Institute for Health and Care Research Global Health Research Group on Homelessness and Mental Health in Africa) aims to develop and evaluate interventions that address the unmet needs of people who are homeless and have severe mental illness (SMI) living in three African countries in ways that are rights-based, contextually grounded, scalable and sustainable.

We will work in the capital city (Addis Ababa) in Ethiopia, a regional city (Tamale) in Ghana, and the capital city (Nairobi) and a rural county (Makueni) in Kenya to understand different approaches to intervention needed across varied settings.

We will be guided by the MRC/NIHR framework on complex interventions and implementation frameworks and emphasise co-production. Formative work will include synthesis of global evidence (systematic review, including grey literature, and a Delphi consensus exercise) on interventions and approaches to homelessness and SMI. We will map contexts; conduct focused ethnography to understand lived experiences of homelessness and SMI; carry out a cross-sectional survey of people who are homeless (n = 750 Ghana/Ethiopia; n = 350 Kenya) to estimate prevalence of SMI and identify prioritised needs; and conduct in-depth interviews and focus group discussions with key stakeholders to understand experiences, challenges and opportunities for intervention. This global and local evidence will feed into Theory of Change (ToC) workshops with stakeholders to establish agreement about valued primary outcomes, map pathways to impact and inform selection and implementation of interventions. Intervention packages to address prioritised needs will be co-produced, piloted and optimised for feasibility and acceptability using participatory action research. We will use rights-based approaches and focus on community-based care to ensure sustainability. Realist approaches will be employed to analyse how contextual variation affects mechanisms and outcomes to inform methods for a subsequent evaluation of larger scale implementation. Extensive capacity-strengthening activities will focus on equipping early career researchers and peer researchers. People with lived experience of SMI and policymakers are an integral part of the research team. Community engagement is supported by working closely with multisectoral Community Advisory Groups.

HOPE will develop evidence to support action to respond to the needs and preferences of people experiencing homelessness and SMI in diverse settings in Africa. We are creating a new partnership of researchers, policymakers, community members and people with lived experience of SMI and homelessness to enable African-led solutions. Key outputs will include contextually relevant practice and policy guidance that supports achievement of inclusive development.

Stigma is significantly impacted by cultural and contextual value systems. People with mental health conditions frequently have to deal with the condition itself and the associated stigma and discrimination. Contextual understanding is essential to design measures and interventions.

This study aimed to explore the experiences and perceptions of people with mental health conditions, their families and key stakeholders.

A qualitative method used to understand mental health-related stigma and its local contexts. Sixteen participants, including service users, caregivers, service providers and health service administrators, were interviewed.

People with mental health conditions and their caregivers experienced various forms of stigmatization which is linked to attributions about the causality of the illness, overt manifestations of mental health condition leading to easy identification and functional impairments that adversely affect participation. Social contact, lived experiences sharing and training of service providers are relevant intervention strategy to address stigma.

Stigma and exclusion are prominent in the experiences of people with mental health conditions and their caregivers in this rural Ethiopian setting. Measurement of stigma and the development of interventions should consider how stigma is socially constructed. Anti-stigma interventions need to be implemented alongside expanded local access to mental healthcare.

Depression and anxiety are the leading contributors to the global burden of disease among young people, accounting for over a third (34.8%) of years lived with disability. Yet there is limited evidence for interventions that prevent adolescent depression and anxiety in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where 90% of adolescents live. This article introduces the ‘Improving Adolescent mentaL health by reducing the Impact of poVErty (ALIVE)’ study, its conceptual framework, objectives, methods and expected outcomes. The aim of the ALIVE study is to develop and pilot-test an intervention that combines poverty reduction with strengthening self-regulation to prevent depression and anxiety among adolescents living in urban poverty in Colombia, Nepal and South Africa.

This aim will be achieved by addressing four objectives: (1) develop a conceptual framework that identifies the causal mechanisms linking poverty, self-regulation and depression and anxiety; (2) develop a multi-component selective prevention intervention targeting self-regulation and poverty among adolescents at high risk of developing depression or anxiety; (3) adapt and validate instruments to measure incidence of depression and anxiety, mediators and implementation parameters of the prevention intervention; and (4) undertake a four-arm pilot cluster randomised controlled trial to assess the feasibility, acceptability and cost of the selective prevention intervention in the three study sites.

The contributions of this study include the active engagement and participation of adolescents in the research process; a focus on the causal mechanisms of the intervention; building an evidence base for prevention interventions in LMICs; and the use of an interdisciplinary approach.

By developing and evaluating an intervention that addresses multidimensional poverty and self-regulation, ALIVE can make contributions to evidence on the integration of mental health into broader development policy and practice.

The recent World Health Organization (WHO) blueprint for dementia research and Lancet Commission on ending stigma and discrimination in mental health has identified a gap around dementia-related measures of stigma and discrimination that can be used in different cultural, language and regional contexts.

We aimed to characterise experiences of discrimination, and report initial psychometric properties of a new tool to capture these experiences, among a global sample of people living with dementia.

We analysed data from 704 people living with dementia who took part in a global survey from 33 different countries and territories. Psychometric properties were examined, including internal consistency and construct validity.

A total of 83% of participants reported discrimination in one or more areas of life, and this was similar across WHO Regions. The exploratory factor analysis factor loadings and scree plot supported a unidimensional structure for the Discrimination and Stigma Scale Ultra Short for People Living with Dementia (DISCUS-Dementia). The instrument demonstrated excellent internal consistency, with most of the construct validity hypotheses being confirmed and qualitative responses demonstrating face validity.

Our analyses suggest that the DISCUS-Dementia performs well with a global sample of people living with dementia. This scale can be integrated into large-scale studies to understand factors associated with stigma and discrimination. It can also provide an opportunity for a structured discussion around stigma and discrimination experiences important to people living with dementia, as well as planning psychosocial services and initiatives to reduce stigma and discrimination.

Care needs represent an essential paradigm in planning residential facility (RF) interventions. However, possible disagreements between users and staff are critical issues in service delivery. The Experience Sampling Method (ESM) tracks experiences in the real world and real time. This study aimed to evaluate the care needs of patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorder (SSD) in RFs and its association with daily activities and mood monitored using the ESM.

As part of the DIAPASON project, 313 residents with SSD were recruited from 99 Italian RFs. Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics were recorded. Care needs, the severity of symptomatology and negative symptoms were assessed. Fifty-six residents were also assessed for 7 consecutive days using the mobile ESM. Descriptive, agreement, predictor and moderator analyses were conducted.

The staff rated a higher number of total and met needs than service users (p < 0.001). Only a slight agreement between users and staff on unmet needs was found in self-care (k = 0.106) and information (k = 0.100) needs, while a moderate agreement was found in accommodation (k = 0.484), food (k = 0.406), childcare (k = 0.530), physical health (k = 0.470), telephone (k = 0.458) and transport (k = 0.425) needs. Older age (−0.15; p < 0.01), longer SSD diagnosis (−0.16; p < 0.01), higher collaboration (−0.16; p < 0.01) and lower symptomatology (−0.16; p < 0.01) decreased the number of unmet needs, while being a female (0.27; p < 0.05) and a shorter length of stay in an RF (0.54; p < 0.001) increased the number of unmet needs. A higher number of unmet needs was associated with a lower amount of time spent in leisure activities or reporting a positive mood: on the contrary, more unmet needs were associated with a greater amount of time spent in religious or non-productive activities. The associations between unmet needs rated by staff and users and momentary mood as assessed using the ESM were not moderated by the severity of symptomatology.

Although care needs are fundamental in planning residential activities aimed at recovery-oriented rehabilitation, RF interventions did not fully meet users' needs, and some disagreements on unmet needs between users and staff were reported. Further efforts are necessary to overcome Italian RF limits in delivering rehabilitative interventions defined by real users' needs to facilitate users' productivity and progress towards personal recovery.

Protecting all human rights of people with mental health conditions is globally important. However, to facilitate practical implementation of rights, it is often necessary to decide which of these rights should be given priority, especially when they conflict with each other.

The aim of the Priorities of Human Rights and Mental Health (PHRAME) project is to develop a replicable approach to establish a proposed set of high-priority human rights of people with mental health conditions, to facilitate practical decision-making and implementation of such rights.

A two-stage Delphi-style study with stakeholders was conducted to generate a list of key rights of people with mental health conditions, and rank priorities among these rights in terms of feasibility, urgency and overall importance.

The stakeholders in this study consistently ranked three rights as top priorities: (a) the right to freedom from torture, cruel inhuman treatment and punishment; (b) the right to health and access to services/treatment; and (c) the right to protection and safety in emergency situations.

Insights from PHRAME can support decision-making about the priority to be given to human rights, to guide practical action. This approach can also be used to assess how human rights are prioritised in different settings and by different stakeholders. This study identifies the clear need for a central voice for people with lived experience in research and implementation of decisions about the priority of human rights, ensuring that action respects the opinion of people whose rights are directly affected.

It is unclear whether the enhancing contact model (ECM) intervention is effective in reducing family caregiving burden and improving hope and quality of life (QOL) among family caregivers of persons with schizophrenia (FCPWS).

We conducted a cluster randomized controlled trial in FCPWS in eight rural townships in Xinjin, Chengdu, China. In total, 253 FCPWS were randomly allocated to the ECM, psychoeducational family intervention (PFI), or treatment as usual (TAU) group. FCPWS in three groups were assessed caregiving burden, QOL and state of hope at baseline (T0), post-intervention (T1), 3-month (T2), and 9-month (T3) follow-up, respectively.

Compared with participants in the TAU group, participants in the ECM group had statistically significantly lower caregiving burden scores both at T1 and T2 (p = 0.0059 and 0.0257, respectively). Compared with participants in the TAU group, participants in the PFI group had statistically significantly higher QOL scores in T1 (p = 0.0406), while participants in the ECM group had statistically significantly higher QOL scores in T3 (p = 0.0240). Participants in both ECM and PFI groups had statistically significantly higher hope scores than those in the TAU group at T1 (p = 0.0160 and 0.0486, respectively).

This is the first study to explore the effectiveness of ECM on reducing family caregiving burden and improving hope and QOL in rural China. The results indicate the ECM intervention, a comprehensive and multifaceted intervention, is more effective than the PFI in various aspects of mental wellbeing among FCPWS. Future research needs to confirm ECM's effectiveness in various population.

In addition to risking their physical well-being, frontline physicians are enduring significant emotional burden both at work and home during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. This study aims to investigate the levels of anxiety and depressive symptoms and to identify associated factors among Bangladeshi physicians during the COVID-19 outbreak.

A cross-sectional study using an online survey following a convenience sampling technique was conducted between April 21 and May 10, 2020. Outcomes assessed included demographic questions, COVID-19 related questions, and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS).

The survey was completed by 412 Bangladeshi physicians. The findings revealed that, in terms of standardized HADS cut-off points, the prevalence of anxiety and depressive symptoms among physicians was 67.72% and 48.5% respectively. Risk factors for higher rates of anxiety or depressive symptoms were: being female, physicians who had experienced COVID-19 like symptoms during the pandemic, those who had not received incentives, those who used self-funded personal protective equipment (PPE), not received adequate training, lacking perceived self-efficacy to manage COVID-19 positive patients, greater perceived stress of being infected, fear of getting assaulted/humiliated, being more connected with social media, having lower income levels to support the family, feeling more agitated, less than 2 h of leisure activity per day and short sleep duration. All these factors were found to be positively associated with anxiety and depression in unadjusted and adjusted statistical models.

This study identifies a real concern about the prevalence of anxiety and depressive symptoms among Bangladeshi physicians and identifies several associated factors during the COVID-19 pandemic. Given the vulnerability of the physicians in this extraordinary period whilst they are putting their own lives at risk to help people infected by COVID-19, health authorities should address the psychological needs of medical staff and formulate effective strategies to support vital frontline health workers.

The Discrimination and Stigma Scale (DISC) is a patient-reported outcome measure which assesses experiences of discrimination among persons with a mental illness globally.

This study evaluated whether the psychometric properties of a short-form version, DISC-Ultra Short (DISCUS) (11-item), could be replicated in a sample of people with a wide range of mental disorders from 21 sites in 15 countries/territories, across six global regions. The frequency of experienced discrimination was reported. Scaling assumptions (confirmatory factor analysis, inter-item and item-total correlations), reliability (internal consistency) and validity (convergent validity, known groups method) were investigated in each region, and by diagnosis group.

1195 people participated. The most frequently reported experiences of discrimination were being shunned or avoided at work (48.7%) and discrimination in making or keeping friends (47.2%). Confirmatory factor analysis supported a unidimensional model across all six regions and five diagnosis groups. Convergent validity was confirmed in the total sample and within all regions [ Internalised Stigma of Mental Illness (ISMI-10): 0.28–0.67, stopping self: 0.54–0.72, stigma consciousness: −0.32–0.57], as was internal consistency reliability (α = 0.74–0.84). Known groups validity was established in the global sample with levels of experienced discrimination significantly higher for those experiencing higher depression [Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ)-2: p < 0.001], lower mental wellbeing [Warwick-Edinburgh Well-being Scale (WEMWBS): p < 0.001], higher suicidal ideation [Beck Hopelessness Scale (BHS)-4: p < 0.001] and higher risk of suicidal behaviour [Suicidal Ideation Attributes Scale (SIDAS): p < 0.001].

The DISCUS is a reliable and valid unidimensional measure of experienced discrimination for use in global settings with similar properties to the longer DISC. It offers a brief assessment of experienced discrimination for use in clinical and research settings.

Stigma related to mental disorders is a barrier to quality mental healthcare. This scoping review aimed to synthesise literature on stigma related to mental disorders in Nepal to understand stigma processes. The anthropological concept of ‘what matters most’ to understand culture and stigma was used to frame the literature on explanatory models, manifestations, consequences, structural facilitators and mitigators, and interventions.

We conducted a scoping review with screening guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). A structured search was done using three international databases (PsycINFO, Medline and Web of Science), one Nepali database (NepJol) and cross-referencing for publications from 1 January 2000 through 24 June 2020. The search was repeated to include structural stigma-related terms. Quality of quantitative studies was assessed using the Systematic Assessment of Quality in Observational Research (SAQOR) tool. The review was registered through the Open Science Framework (OSF) (osf.io/u8jhn).

The searches yielded 57 studies over a 20-year period: 19 quantitative, 19 qualitative, nine mixed methods, five review articles, two ethnographies and three other types of studies. The review identified nine stigma measures used in Nepal, one stigma intervention, and no studies focused on adolescent and child mental health stigma. The findings suggest that ‘what matters most’ in Nepali culture for service users, caregivers, community members and health workers include prestige, productivity, privacy, acceptance, marriage and resources. Cultural values related to ‘what matters most’ are reflected in structural barriers and facilitators including lack of policies, programme planning and resources. Most studies using quantitative tools to assess stigma did not describe cultural adaptation or validation processes, and 15 out of the 18 quantitative studies were ‘low-quality’ on the SAQOR quality rating. The review revealed clear gaps in implementation and evaluation of stigma interventions in Nepal with only one intervention reported, and most stigma measures not culturally adapted for use.

As stigma processes are complex and interlinked in their influence on ‘what matters most’ and structural barriers and facilitators, more studies are required to understand this complexity and establish effective interventions targeting multiple domains. We suggest that stigma researchers should clarify conceptual models to inform study design and interpretations. There is a need to develop procedures for the systematic cultural adaptation of stigma assessment tools. Research should be conducted to understand the forms and drivers of structural stigma and to expand intervention research to evaluate strategies for stigma reduction.