WHO declared that mental health care should be considered one essential health service to be maintained during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. This study aims to describe the effect of lockdown and restrictions due to the COVID-19 pandemic in Italy on mental health services’ utilisation, by considering psychiatric diagnoses and type of mental health contacts.

The study was conducted in the Verona catchment area, located in the Veneto region (northeastern Italy). For each patient, mental health contacts were grouped into: (1) outpatient care, (2) social and supportive interventions, (3) rehabilitation interventions, (4) multi-professional assessments, (5) day care. A ‘difference in differences’ approach was used: difference in the number of contacts between 2019 and 2020 on the weeks of lockdown and intermediate restrictions was compared with the same difference in weeks of no or reduced restrictions, and such difference was interpreted as the effect of restrictions. Both a global regression on all contacts and separate regressions for each type of service were performed and Incidence Rate Ratios (IRRs) were calculated.

In 2020, a significant reduction in the number of patients who had mental health contacts was found, both overall and for most of the patients’ characteristics considered (except for people aged 18–24 years for foreign-born population and for those with a diagnosis of schizophrenia. Moreover, in 2020 mental health contacts had a reduction of 57 096 (−33.9%) with respect to 2019; such difference remained significant across the various type of contacts considered, with rehabilitation interventions and day care showing the greatest reduction. Negative Binomial regressions displayed a statistically significant effect of lockdown, but not of intermediate restrictions, in terms of reduction in the number of contacts. The lockdown period was responsible of a 32.7% reduction (IRR 0.673; p-value <0.001) in the overall number of contacts. All type of mental health contacts showed a reduction ascribable to the lockdown, except social and supportive interventions.

Despite the access to community mental health care during the pandemic was overall reduced, the mental health system in the Verona catchment area was able to maintain support for more vulnerable and severely ill patients, by providing continuity of care and day-by-day support through social and supportive interventions.

The aim of this paper is to present a novel case for the formation, operation and evaluation of a community advisory aboard comprised of Muslims residing in the San Francisco Bay Area, California that utilised a community based participatory approach to address local Muslim mental health needs. The CAB was recruited in partnership with the Muslim Community Association (MCA), one of the largest Islamic centres in the San Franscisco Bay Area. In addition to describing the development of the CAB, the authors present the findings of the evaluation and synthesis of best processes based on CAB members' feedback.

To evaluate the perceived community advisory board members' perceptions of their roles and elicit feedback on how to enhance the relationship between the university team and the CAB, an evaluation was conducted by an independent team who was not part of the research process. Data was collected using anonymous individual surveys and small group open discussions that were conducted over three evaluation meetings. The evaluation utilised mixed method data collection strategies using questions from Schulz et al. (2003, Evaluation and Program Planning 26, 249–262), an instrument for evaluating dimensions of group dynamics within CBPR partnerships.

Results of the evaluation within the sphere of CAB operation indicated that CAB members found the greatest satisfaction from their contributions through direct participation in the research activities that were conducted by the university-CAB team. The collective responses indicated that most CAB members were satisfied with trust built between the university-CAB team and the diversity represented in the members of the board. However, given that the Bay Area is home to a very diverse Muslim community, challenges in recruiting representatives that account for all possible self-identifying groups was reported by the CAB with recommendations to recruit religious leaders. Recommendations also included eliciting funds for potential financial compensation for CAB members.

The Stanford-San Francisco Bay Area CAB demonstrated that empowering community members through direct participation, creating channels and safe spaces for feedback help create community rooted research that carry the true voices of marginalised communities and reflects their evolving needs

Not only is nature essential for human existence, but many of its functions and contributions are irreplaceable. Studying the impact of these changes on individuals and communities, researchers and public health officials have largely focused on physical health. Our aim is to better understand how climate change also exacerbates many social and environmental risk factors for mental health and psychosocial problems, and can lead to emotional distress, the development of new mental health conditions and a worsening situation for people already living with these conditions.

We considered all possible direct and indirect pathways by which climate change can affect mental health. We built a framework which includes climate change-related hazards, climate change-related global environmental threats, social and environmental exposure pathways, and vulnerability factors and inequalities to derive possible mental health and psychosocial outcomes.

We identified five approaches to address the mental health and psychosocial impacts of climate change which we suggest should be implemented with urgency: (1) integrate climate change considerations into policies and programmes for mental health, to better prepare for and respond to the climate crisis; (2) integrate mental health and psychosocial support within policies and programmes dealing with climate change and health; (3) build upon global commitments including the Sustainable Development Goals, the Paris Agreement and the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction; (4) implement multisectoral and community-based approaches to reduce vulnerabilities and address the mental health and psychosocial impacts of climate change; and (5) address the large gaps that exist in funding both for mental health and for responding to the health impacts of climate change.

There is growing evidence of the various mechanisms by which climate change is affecting mental health. Given the human impacts of climate change, mental health and psychosocial well-being need to be one of the main focuses of climate action. Therefore, countries need to dramatically accelerate their responses to climate change, including efforts to address its impacts on mental health and psychosocial well-being.

Lithium has long been believed to reduce the risk of suicide and suicidal behaviour in people with mood disorders. Previous meta-analyses appeared to support this belief, but excluded relevant data due to the difficulty of conducting meta-analysis of rare events. The current study is an updated systematic review and meta-analysis that includes all eligible data, and evaluates suicide, non-fatal suicidal behaviour (including suicidal ideation) and suicide attempts.

We searched PubMed, PsycINFO and Embase and some trial registers. We included all randomised trials comparing lithium and placebo or treatment as usual in mood disorders published after 2000, to ensure suicide was reliably reported. Trial quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Pooled data were analysed using Fisher's Exact test. In addition, meta-analysis was conducted using various methods, prioritizing the Exact method. All trials were included in the analysis of suicide initially, regardless of whether they reported on suicide or not. We conducted a sensitivity analysis with trials that specifically reported on suicides and one that included trials published before 2000. Pre-specified subgroup analyses were performed involving suicide prevention trials, trials excluding people already taking lithium, trials involving people with bipolar disorder exclusively and those involving people with mixed affective diagnoses. Non-fatal suicidal behaviour and suicide attempts were analysed using the same methods, but only trials that reported these outcomes were included. PROSPERO registration: CRD42021265809.

Twelve eligible studies involving 2578 participants were included. The pooled suicide rate was 0.2% for people randomised to lithium and 0.4% with placebo or treatment as usual, which was not a statistically significant difference; odds ratio (OR) = 0.41 (95% confidence interval 0.03–2.49), p = 0.45. Meta-analysis using the Exact method produced an OR of 0.42 (95% confidence interval 0.01–4.5). The result was not substantially different when restricted to 11 trials that explicitly reported suicides and remained statistically non-significant when including 15 trials published before 2000 (mostly in the 1970s). There were no significant differences in any subgroup analysis. There was no difference in rates of all non-fatal suicidal behaviour in seven trials that reported this outcome, or in five trials that reported suicide attempts specifically. Meta-analyses using other methods also revealed no statistically significant differences.

Evidence from randomised trials is inconclusive and does not support the idea that lithium prevents suicide or suicidal behaviour.

The mounting evidence for effective delivery of psychological interventions by non-specialists in low- and middle-income settings has led to a rapid expansion of mental health and psychosocial support trainings globally. As such, there is a demand for strategies on how to train and implement these services to attain adequate quality. This study aims to evaluate the added value of a competency-driven approach to training of facilitators for a group intervention for children with severe emotional distress in Lebanon.

In a controlled before and after study, 24 trainees were randomly allocated to participate in either a competency-driven training (CDT) or training-as-usual (TAU) (1 : 1) for a psychological intervention for children with severe emotional distress. We assessed the change in demonstrated competencies, using standardised role-plays, before and after the training. Measures included the 13-item Working with children-Assessment of Competencies Tool (WeACT), the 15-item ENhancing Assessment of Common Therapeutic factors (ENACT) and the 6-item Group facilitation: Assessment of Competencies Tool (GroupACT). The trainer in the experimental arm used pre-training and during training competency assessment scores to make real-time adjustment to training delivery. Due to COVID-19 pandemic restrictions, all activities were done remotely.

CDT resulted in significantly better outcomes on increasing competencies on the WeACT (repeated measures analysis of variance; F(1, 22) = 6.49, p < 0.018) and on the GroupACT (Mann–Whitney U = 22, p < 0.003), though not statistically significant on the ENACT. There is no significant between-group difference on the reduction of harmful behaviours, mainly because both forms of training appear equally successful in eliminating such behaviours.

This proof-of-concept study demonstrates the potential of CDT, using standardised assessment of trainee competencies, to contribute to better training outcomes without extending the duration of training. CDT can result in up to 18% greater increase in adequate competency, when compared to TAU. The study also yields recommendations for further enhancing the benefits of competency-driven strategies. A fully powered trial is needed to confirm these findings.

Due to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) different countries implemented quarantine measures to limit the spread of the virus. Many studies analysed the mental health consequences of restrictive confinement, some of which focused their attention on specific populations. The general public's mental health also requires significant attention, however. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of the COVID-19 quarantine on the general population's mental health in different European countries. Risk and protective factors associated with the psychological symptoms were analysed.

A systematic search was conducted on four electronic databases (PubMed, PsycINFO, Scopus and Google Scholar). Studies published up until 20th April 2021, and following eligibility criteria were selected for this review. One thousand three hundred thirty-five (1335) studies were screened, 105 of which were included. Via network analysis, the current study investigated the pathways that underlie possible risk factors for mental health outcomes.

Anxiety, depression, distress and post-traumatic symptoms are frequently experienced during the COVID-19 quarantine and are often associated with changes in sleeping and eating habits. Some socio-demographic and COVID-19-related variables were found to be risk factors for an individual's wellbeing. In particular, being female, young, having a low income, being unemployed and having COVID-19-like symptoms or chronic disorders, were found to be the most common risk factors for mental health symptoms.

The COVID-19 pandemic represented an unprecedented threat to mental health globally. In order to prevent psychological morbidity and offer support tailored to short-, medium- and long-term negative outcomes, it is essential to identify the direct and indirect psychosocial effects of the lockdown and quarantine measures, especially in certain vulnerable groups. In addition to measures to reduce the curve of viral transmission, policy makers should urgently take into consideration provisions to alleviate hazards to mental health.

To provide a cross-country analysis of selection, availability, prices and affordability of essential medicines for mental health conditions, aiming to identify areas for improvement.

We used the World Health Organization (WHO) online repository of national essential medicines lists (EMLs) to extract information on the inclusion of essential psychotropic medicines within each country's EML. Data on psychotropic medicine availability, price and affordability were obtained from the Health Action International global database. Additional information on country availability, prices and affordability of essential medicines for mental disorders was identified by searching, up to January 2021, PubMed/Medline, CINAHIL, Scopus and the WHO Regional Databases. We summarised and compared the indicators across lowest-price generic and originator brand medicines in the public and private sectors, and by country income groups.

A total of 112 national EMLs were analysed, and data on psychotropic medicine availability, price and affordability were obtained from 87 surveys. While some WHO essential psychotropic medicines, such as chlorpromazine, haloperidol, amitriptyline, carbamazepine and diazepam, were selected by most national lists, irrespective of the country income level, other essential medicines, such as risperidone or clozapine, were included by most national lists in high-income countries, but only by a minority of lists in low-income countries. Up to 40% of low-income countries did not include medicines that have been in the WHO list for decades, such as long-acting fluphenazine, lithium carbonate and clomipramine. The availability of generic and originator psychotropic medicines in the public sector was below 50% for all medicines, with low-income countries showing rates lower than the overall average. Analysis of price data revealed that procurement prices were lower than patient prices in the public sector, and medicines in the private sector were associated with the highest prices. In low-income countries, the average patient price for amitriptyline and fluoxetine was three times the international unit reference price, while the average patient price for diazepam was ten times the international unit reference price. Affordability was higher in the public than the private sector, and in high-income than low-income countries.

Access to medicines for mental health conditions is an ongoing challenge for health systems worldwide, and no countries can claim to be fully aligned with the general principle of providing full access to essential psychotropic medicines. Low availability and high costs are major barriers to the use of and adherence to essential psychotropic medicines, particularly in low-and middle-income countries.

Lower parental education has been linked to adverse youth mental health outcomes. However, the relationship between parental education and youth suicidal behaviours remains unclear. We explored the association between parental education and youth suicidal ideation and attempts, and examined whether sociocultural contexts moderate such associations.

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis with a systematic literature search in PubMed, PsycINFO, Medline and Embase from 1900 to December 2020 for studies with participants aged 0–18, and provided quantitative data on the association between parental education and youth suicidal ideation and attempts (death included). Only articles published in English in peer-reviewed journals were considered. Two authors independently assessed eligibility of the articles. One author extracted data [e.g. number of cases and non-cases in each parental education level, effect sizes in forms of odds ratios (ORs) or beta coefficients]. We then calculated pooled ORs using a random-effects model and used moderator analysis to investigate heterogeneity.

We included a total of 59 articles (63 study samples, totalling 2 738 374 subjects) in the meta-analysis. Lower parental education was associated with youth suicidal attempts [OR = 1.12, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) = 1.04–1.21] but not with suicidal ideation (OR = 1.05, 95% CI = 0.98–1.12). Geographical region and country income level moderated the associations. Lower parental education was associated with an increased risk of youth suicidal attempts in Northern America (OR = 1.26, 95% CI = 1.10–1.45), but with a decreased risk in Eastern and South-Eastern Asia (OR = 0.72, 95% CI = 0.54–0.96). An association of lower parental education and increased risk of youth suicidal ideation was present in high- income countries (HICs) (OR = 1.14, 95% CI = 1.05–1.25), and absent in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) (OR = 0.91, 95% CI = 0.77–1.08).

The association between youth suicidal behaviours and parental education seems to differ across geographical and economical contexts, suggesting that cultural, psychosocial or biological factors may play a role in explaining this association. Although there was high heterogeneity in the studies reviewed, this evidence suggests that the role of familial sociodemographic characteristics in youth suicidality may not be universal. This highlights the need to consider cultural, as well as familial factors in the clinical assessment and management of youth's suicidal behaviours in our increasingly multicultural societies, as well as in developing prevention and intervention strategies for youth suicide.

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.

The mental health of individuals who have been forcibly displaced can be impacted both by war-related traumatic events and displacement-related stressors, which arise as a consequence of their migratory journey and subsequent experiences. In addition to focusing on mental disorders, there is a need to explore broader psychosocial outcomes that are important for forcibly displaced people. Our aim is to present a coherent explanatory framework to understand how both past traumatic events and ongoing stressors operating throughout forcibly displaced people's social environment can impact mental health and psychosocial wellbeing.

We describe the capability approach (CA), a human development framework that foregrounds individuals’ freedom to engage in forms of being and doing that are valuable to them. We consider the opportunities that the CA provides for understanding how a myriad of factors can impact forcibly displaced people, and how different forms of support can be configured to meet the needs of particular people and communities.

The CA recognises that various factors can share a common putative causal mechanism in their impact on forcibly displaced people, i.e. these factors limit a person's ability to develop capabilities and their freedom to engage in valued forms of being and doing. The rights based ethos of the CA enables multisectoral and coordinated activity, which can be directed towards addressing factors across the social environment. Importantly, the CA helps to explain why particular forms of support may be more beneficial for individuals or communities at certain times compared to others.

The application of the CA can help to guard against the risk that the aspirations of assessment instruments and interventions aimed at supporting forcibly displaced people are narrowly focused on addressing distress and disorders, to instead adopt a more expansive focus on forcibly displaced people's potential and the possibilities that they wish to realise.

The theory of ‘what matters most’ (WMM) has been developed to understand differences in mental illness stigma between cultures, postulating that stigma becomes most pervasive in situations that matter most in a specific cultural context. The rise of populism in Western societies demonstrates that also within one cultural context, different values ‘matter most’ to different groups. We expand the WMM framework to explore the spectrum of stigma manifestations within Western societies, relating it to both conservative/authoritarian and liberal/modern values. From our findings, we will develop hypotheses on how further research into value orientations and stigma might address potential blind spots in stigma research.

Based on a narrative review of the literature on mental illness stigma and value orientations, we apply the WMM framework to cultural mechanisms of stigma within modern Western societies.

There are several studies showing an association between traditional, authoritarian, conservative values with stronger mental illness stigma, while studies examining the stigma within liberal, modern value orientations are scarce. We hypothesise on situations where encountering a person with mental illness could threaten liberal values and thus might provoke stigma among persons with such value orientations. For example, living with a person with mental illness could be seen as consuming energy and time, thereby jeopardising ‘self-actualisation’, the modern value of realising one's own full potential. As a result, a person highly valuing self-actualisation might try to avoid contact with persons with mental illness. Instances of potential ‘liberal stigma’ also include structural stigma or self-stigma, when, e.g. changing assumptions of what is considered ‘normal’ increase perceptions of being fundamentally different when experiencing mental illness.

‘WMM’ appears to be a useful framework to direct research to potential blind spots within the field of stigma research. Looking at instances where liberal values conflict with dealing with a person with mental illness could provide a more comprehensive understanding of stigma experiences among persons with mental illness. However, for measuring stigma, tapping into liberal variations of mental illness stigma is methodologically challenging. Qualitative work could be the first step to elicit potential stigma experiences based on conflicts with liberal values.

To develop recommendations for strategies and interventions to reduce stigma and discrimination related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), through reviewing and synthesising evidence in relation to COVID-19 and other disease outbreaks and infectious/stigmatised conditions from systematic reviews and primary studies and recommendations from additional materials.

Rapid review, drawing on the World Health Organization's (WHO) methodology for developing interim guidelines during health emergencies. PubMed/MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Central and Campbell Collaboration searched up to mid-April 2020. Searches were supplemented by reference-searching and expert recommendations. Searches were designed to identify: (1) systematic reviews (<10 years), or (2) primary intervention studies (no date limit) reporting evidence on anti-stigma interventions (in relation to COVID-19 or other infectious/stigmatised conditions) or (3) additional relevant materials. Data were extracted on population, intervention, outcome and results. These data were compiled into evidence summary tables and narrative overviews. Recommendations on strategies for COVID-19 stigma-reduction were developed using the WHO ‘Evidence to Decision’ framework approach. The review protocol was registered with PROSPERO (registration ID: CRD42020177677).

The searches identified a total of 4150 potentially relevant records, from which 12 systematic reviews and 29 additional articles were included. Overarching considerations and specific recommendations focus on: (1) language/words used in relation to COVID-19 and affected people; (2) media/journalistic practices; (3) public health interventions; (4) targeted public health interventions for key groups and (5) involving communities and key stakeholders.

These recommendations represent the first consolidated evidence-based guidance on stigma and discrimination reduction in relation to COVID-19. Mitigating the impact of stigma is critical in reducing distress and negative experiences, and strengthening communities' resolve to work together during exceptional circumstances. Ultimately, reducing stigma helps addressing structural inequalities that drive marginalisation and exacerbate both health risks and the impact of stigma. Administrations and decision makers are urged to consider integrating these recommendations into the ongoing COVID-19 response.

When the Interagency Standing Committee (IASC) adopted the composite term mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS) and published its guidelines for MHPSS in emergency settings in 2007, it aimed to build consensus and strengthen coordination among relevant humanitarian actors. The term MHPSS offered an inclusive tent by welcoming the different terminologies, explanatory models and intervention methods of diverse actors across several humanitarian sectors (e.g., health, protection, education, nutrition). Since its introduction, the term has become well-established within the global humanitarian system. However, it has also been critiqued for papering over substantive differences in the intervention priorities and conceptual frameworks that inform the wide range of interventions described as MHPSS. Our aims are to clarify those conceptual frameworks, to argue for their essential complementarity and to illustrate the perils of failing to adequately consider the causal models and theories of change that underlie our interventions.

We describe the historical backdrop against which the term MHPSS and the IASC guidelines were developed, as well as their impact on improving relations and coordination among different aid sectors. We consider the conceptual fuzziness in the field of MHPSS and the lack of clear articulation of the different conceptual frameworks that guide interventions. We describe the explanatory models and intervention approaches of two primary frameworks within MHPSS, which we label clinical and social-environmental. Using the examples of intimate partner violence and compromised parenting in humanitarian settings, we illustrate the complementarity of these two frameworks, as well as the challenges that can arise when either framework is inappropriately applied.

Clinical interventions prioritise the role of intrapersonal variables, biological and/or psychological, as mediators of change in the treatment of distress. Social-environmental interventions emphasise the role of social determinants of distress and target factors in the social and material environments in order to lower distress and increase resilience in the face of adversity. Both approaches play a critical role in humanitarian settings; however, the rationale for adopting one or the other approach is commonly insufficiently articulated and should be based on a thorough assessment of causal processes at multiple levels of the social ecology.

Greater attention to the ‘why’ of our intervention choices and more explicit articulation of the causal models and theories of change that underlie those decisions (i.e., the ‘how’), may strengthen intervention effects and minimise the risk of applying the inappropriate framework and actions to a particular problem.

Despite recent global attention to mental health and psychosocial support services and a growing body of evidence-support interventions, few mental health services have been established at a regional or national scale in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). There are myriad challenges and barriers ranging from testing interventions that do not target priority needs of populations or policymakers to interventions that cannot achieve adequate coverage to decrease the treatment gap in LMIC.

We propose a ‘roadmap to impact’ process that guides planning for interventions to move from the research space to the implementation space.

We establish four criteria and nine associated indicators that can be evaluated in low-resource settings to foster the greatest likelihood of successfully scaling mental health and psychosocial interventions. The criteria are relevance (indicators: population need, cultural and contextual fit), effectiveness (change in mental health outcome, change in hypothesised mechanism of action), quality (adherence, competence, attendance) and feasibility (coverage, cost). In the research space, relevance and effectiveness need to be established before moving into the implementation space. In the implementation space, ongoing monitoring of quality and feasibility is required to achieve and maintain a positive public health impact. Ultimately, a database or repository needs to be developed with these criteria and indicators to help researchers establish and monitor minimum benchmarks for the indicators, and for policymakers and practitioners to be able to select what interventions will be most likely to succeed in their settings.

A practicable roadmap with a sequence of measurable indicators is an important step to delivering interventions at scale and reducing the mental health treatment gap around the world.

Observational studies have shown a relationship between maternal mental health (MMH) and child development, but few studies have evaluated whether MMH interventions improve child-related outcomes, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. The objective of this review is to synthesise findings on the effectiveness of MMH interventions to improve child-related outcomes in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).

We searched for randomised controlled trials conducted in LMICs evaluating interventions with a MMH component and reporting children's outcomes. Meta-analysis was performed on outcomes included in at least two trials.

We identified 21 trials with 28 284 mother–child dyads. Most trials were conducted in middle-income countries, evaluating home visiting interventions delivered by general health workers, starting in the third trimester of pregnancy. Only ten trials described acceptable methods for blinding outcome assessors. Four trials showed high risk of bias in at least two of the seven domains assessed in this review. Narrative synthesis showed promising but inconclusive findings for child-related outcomes. Meta-analysis identified a sizeable impact of interventions on exclusive breastfeeding (risk ratio = 1.39, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.13–1.71, ten trials, N = 4749 mother–child dyads, I2 = 61%) and a small effect on child height-for-age at 6-months (std. mean difference = 0.13, 95% CI: 0.02–0.24, three trials, N = 1388, I2 = 0%). Meta-analyses did not identify intervention benefits for child cognitive and other growth outcomes; however, few trials measured these outcomes.

These findings support the importance of MMH to improve child-related outcomes in LMICs, particularly exclusive breastfeeding. Given, the small number of trials and methodological limitations, more rigorous trials should be conducted.

To identify and synthesise the literature on the cost of mental disorders.

Systematic literature searches were conducted in the databases PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, EconLit, NHS York Database and PsychInfo using key terms for cost and mental disorders. Searches were restricted to January 1980–May 2019. The inclusion criteria were: (1) cost-of-illness studies or cost-analyses; (2) diagnosis of at least one mental disorder; (3) study population based on the general population; (4) outcome in monetary units. The systematic review was preregistered on PROSPERO (ID: CRD42019127783).

In total, 13 579 potential titles and abstracts were screened and 439 full-text articles were evaluated by two independent reviewers. Of these, 112 articles were included from the systematic searches and 31 additional articles from snowball searching, resulting in 143 included articles. Data were available from 48 countries and categorised according to nine mental disorder groups. The quality of the studies varied widely and there was a lack of studies from low- and middle-income countries and for certain types of mental disorders (e.g. intellectual disabilities and eating disorders). Our study showed that certain groups of mental disorders are more costly than others and that these rankings are relatively stable between countries. An interactive data visualisation site can be found here: https://nbepi.com/econ.

This is the first study to provide a comprehensive overview of the cost of mental disorders worldwide.