Qualitative assessment of evidence-informed adolescent mental health policymaking in India: insights from project SAMA

被引:0
|
作者
Ivory, Alice [1 ]
Arelingaiah, Mutharaju [2 ]
Janardhana, Navaneetham [2 ]
Bhola, Poornima [3 ]
Hugh-Jones, Siobhan [4 ]
Mirzoev, Tolib [1 ]
机构
[1] London Sch Hyg & Trop Med, Dept Global Hlth & Dev, London, England
[2] Natl Institue Mental Hlth & Neurosci, Dept Psychiat Social Work, Bangalore, India
[3] Natl Inst Mental Hlth & Neurosci, Dept Clin Psychol, Bangalore, India
[4] Univ Leeds, Sch Psychol, Leeds, England
来源
HEALTH RESEARCH POLICY AND SYSTEMS | 2024年 / 22卷 / 01期
基金
英国医学研究理事会;
关键词
Adolescent mental health; Health policy; Evidence-informed policy; India; Asia low- and middle-income countries; NATIONAL POLICY; POLITICS; CONTEXT; UGANDA; SECTOR; POWER;
D O I
10.1186/s12961-024-01184-w
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
BackgroundThe importance of evidence-informed health policymaking is widely recognized. However, many low- and middle-income countries lack evidence-informed mental health policies due to insufficient data, stigma or lack of resources. Various policies address adolescent mental health in India, but published knowledge on their evidence-informed nature is limited. In this paper, we report results of our analysis of the role of evidence in adolescent mental health policymaking in India.MethodsThis paper reports findings from the document analysis of key policy documentation (n = 10) and in-depth interviews with policy actors including policymakers, researchers, practitioners and intermediaries (n = 13). Framework analysis was used, informed by the components of a conceptual framework adapted from the literature: actors, policy and evidence processes, nature of evidence itself and contextual influences.ResultsResults show that adolescent mental health policies in India were generally evidence-informed, with more key evidence becoming generally available from 2010 onwards. Both formal and informal evidence informed mental health policies, particularly agenda-setting and policy development. Mental health policymaking in India is deemed important yet relatively neglected due to competing policy priorities and structural barriers such as stigma. Use of evidence in mental health policymaking reflected differing values, interests, relative powers and ideologies of policy actors. Involvement of government officials in evidence generation often resulted in successful evidence uptake in policy decisions. Policy actors often favoured formal and quantitative evidence, with a tendency to accept global evidence that aligns with personal values.ConclusionsThere is a need to ensure a balanced and complementary combination of formal and informal evidence for policy decisions. Evidence generation, dissemination and use for policy processes should recognize evidence preferences by key stakeholders, while prioritizing locally available evidence where possible. To help this, a balanced involvement of policy actors can ensure complementary perspectives in evidence production and policy agendas. This continued generation and promotion of evidence can also help reduce societal stigma around mental health and promote mental health as a key policy priority.
引用
收藏
页数:19
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 1: What is evidence-informed policymaking?
    Andrew D Oxman
    John N Lavis
    Simon Lewin
    Atle Fretheim
    [J]. Health Research Policy and Systems, 7
  • [2] SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 1: What is evidence-informed policymaking?
    Oxman, Andrew D.
    Lavis, John N.
    Lewin, Simon
    Fretheim, Atle
    [J]. HEALTH RESEARCH POLICY AND SYSTEMS, 2009, 7
  • [3] SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 15: Engaging the public in evidence-informed policymaking
    Andrew D Oxman
    Simon Lewin
    John N Lavis
    Atle Fretheim
    [J]. Health Research Policy and Systems, 7
  • [4] SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 15: Engaging the public in evidence-informed policymaking
    Oxman, Andrew D.
    Lewin, Simon
    Lavis, John N.
    Fretheim, Atle
    [J]. HEALTH RESEARCH POLICY AND SYSTEMS, 2009, 7 : 520 - 526
  • [5] SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 3: Setting priorities for supporting evidence-informed policymaking
    John N Lavis
    Andrew D Oxman
    Simon Lewin
    Atle Fretheim
    [J]. Health Research Policy and Systems, 7
  • [6] SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 3: Setting priorities for supporting evidence-informed policymaking
    Lavis, John N.
    Oxman, Andrew D.
    Lewin, Simon
    Fretheim, Atle
    [J]. HEALTH RESEARCH POLICY AND SYSTEMS, 2009, 7 : 255 - 261
  • [7] Pharmaceutical interventions in mental health: A review of the literature to support evidence-informed policymaking
    Silva, Sarah Nascimento
    Lima, Marina Guimaraes
    Ruas, Cristina Mariano
    [J]. RESEARCH IN SOCIAL & ADMINISTRATIVE PHARMACY, 2018, 14 (10): : 891 - 900
  • [8] SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP)
    John N Lavis
    Andrew D Oxman
    Simon Lewin
    Atle Fretheim
    [J]. Health Research Policy and Systems, 7 (Suppl 1)
  • [9] SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 13: Preparing and using policy briefs to support evidence-informed policymaking
    Lavis, John N.
    Permanand, Govin
    Oxman, Andrew D.
    Lewin, Simon
    Fretheim, Atle
    [J]. HEALTH RESEARCH POLICY AND SYSTEMS, 2009, 7 : 507 - 513
  • [10] SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 13: Preparing and using policy briefs to support evidence-informed policymaking
    John N Lavis
    Govin Permanand
    Andrew D Oxman
    Simon Lewin
    Atle Fretheim
    [J]. Health Research Policy and Systems, 7