ReviewGlobal mental health (Cambridge, England)2025
Global mental health and psychosocial support programming: An expert review of major implementation and funding challenges.
Review in Global mental health (Cambridge, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
25 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The global mental health (GMH) field aims to equitably improve mental health and well-being everywhere. This article reviews persistent common challenges hindering sustained, high-quality delivery of mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS). Our focus is on programming that is funded or implemented by external organizations, typically universities or international non-governmental organizations from high-income countries. It is a consensus statement of MHPSS practitioners, programmers and researchers working for these organizations and some who are locally based who observe these programs in action. We comment on progress to date, barriers and recommendations for change and the importance of promoting sustained integration of MHPSS into health and social service systems through a comprehensive, recovery-oriented system of care. We call for prioritizing often-neglected issues (e.g., stigma, severe mental health conditions and neurodevelopmental conditions), strengthening workforce training and supervision and monitoring and evaluation systems to ensure program quality. The continued dominance of the Global North in shaping GMH programming priorities remains a concern. We advocate for a greater involvement of local workers and communities in agenda-setting for programs, culturally grounded implementation and long-term capacity building. Evidence-based practices must be met with contextual relevance, and comprehensive guidelines for sustained support are needed for development settings. For persistent funding challenges, we recommend clearer funder objectives, investment in in-house mental health expertise and funder coordination with prioritization of complementary programming. These recommendations are essential to realizing equitable, comprehensive, evidence-based and contextually grounded GMH programming.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.