Mental health data available in representative surveys conducted in Latin America and the Caribbean countries: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Mental health data from Latin America and the Caribbean countries (LACC) national and international surveys are essential for public health surveillance. This review aimed to identify and describe available mental health survey data in LACC, providing access details for researchers. METHODS: Our study was a scoping review. The search for available mental health survey data was conducted in PubMed and through grey literature searches, and the search dates were between 26 August 2021 and 15 October 2021. Included survey data were/had (1) nationally representative, (2) the latest version available from 2012 onward, (3) collected in at least one LACC and (4) at least one mental health variable or related factor. We accepted all written languages, including Spanish and English. RESULTS: A total of 56 national and 13 international surveys were included, with data available on 95 mental health variables classified into 10 categories. Most national surveys were performed in upper-middle-income countries. Variables categorised as 'Substance use' and 'Violence' were the most frequent. Mexico and Colombia had the highest production in both the national and international surveys. The main target population was the adult population. However, there are several mental health topics and LACC yet unsurveyed. CONCLUSION: We identified a total of 69 representative surveys from LACCs since 2012. We categorised the available data on mental health variables into 10 categories, and provided technical details to facilitate the future selection and use of these surveys.

Development of a Framework for the Implementation of Synchronous Digital Mental Health: Realist Synthesis of Systematic Reviews.

BACKGROUND: The use of technologies has served to reduce gaps in access to treatment, and digital health interventions show promise in the care of mental health problems. However, to understand what and how these interventions work, it is imperative to document the aspects related to their challenging implementation. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine what evidence is available for synchronous digital mental health implementation and to develop a framework, informed by a realist review, to explain what makes digital mental health interventions work for people with mental health problems. METHODS: The SPIDER (Sample, Phenomenon of Interest, Design, Evaluation, and Research type) framework was used to develop the following review question: What makes digital mental health interventions with a synchronous component work on people with mental health problems, including depression, anxiety, or stress, based on implementation, economic, quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods studies? The MEDLINE, EBM Reviews, PsycINFO, EMBASE, SCOPUS, CINAHL Complete, and Web of Science databases were searched from January 1, 2015, to September 2020 with no language restriction. A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews-2 (AMSTAR-2) was used to assess the risk of bias and Confidence in Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research (CERQual) was used to assess the confidence in cumulative evidence. Realist synthesis analysis allowed for developing a framework on the implementation of synchronous digital mental health using a grounded-theory approach with an emergent approach. RESULTS: A total of 21 systematic reviews were included in the study. Among these, 90% (n=19) presented a critically low confidence level as assessed with AMSTAR-2. The realist synthesis allowed for the development of three hypotheses to identify the context and mechanisms in which these interventions achieve these outcomes: (1) these interventions reach populations otherwise unable to have access because they do not require the physical presence of the therapist nor the patient, thereby tackling geographic barriers posed by in-person therapy; (2) these interventions reach populations otherwise unable to have access because they can be successfully delivered by nonspecialists, which makes them more cost-effective to implement in health services; and (3) these interventions are acceptable and show good results in satisfaction because they require less need of disclosure and provide more privacy, comfortability, and participation, enabling the establishment of rapport with the therapist. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a framework with three hypotheses that explain what makes digital mental health interventions with a synchronous component work on people with mental health problems. Each hypothesis represents essential outcomes in the implementation process. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42020203811; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020203811. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.12688/f1000research.27150.2.

Development of a framework for the implementation of synchronous e-mental health: a protocol for a realist synthesis of systematic reviews.

Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, it has been necessary to incorporate technologies in the care of mental health problems. But there have been difficulties in the application of technology-based interventions in mental health. Some quantitative systematic reviews don't allow us to fully identify and properly describe this subject. In order to answer the question "how do electronic interventions apply in mental health and what makes the application of any of these interventions work", this study will carry out an overview of systematic reviews, which will make it possible to develop a theoretical framework on the implementation of electronic care in mental health problems. Methods: We will search MEDLINE, EBM Reviews, PsycINFO, EMBASE, SCOPUS, CINAHL Complete, and Web of Science databases from 1st January 2015 to September 2020, with no language restriction. We will follow a qualitative method approach and include systematic reviews that assess primary studies relating to adults with common mental health problems using any type of mobile mental health intervention that includes a synchronic component and communication with a mental health professional. For the analysis, we will make a meta-synthesis of the systematic reviews, using an emergent grounded theory approach to synthesize the information, prioritizing the systematic reviews with the lowest risk of bias in the AMSTAR-2 tool. The meta-synthesis will be based on interpreting, integrating, and inferring the evaluation elements to understand better the e-health implementation process for patients with mental health problems. Finally, we will present the overall assessment in a Summary of Qualitative Findings table. Conclusion: Our results will allow a better understanding of the facilitator and limitations in implementing e-health interventions for mental health problems.