Resources search

Purpose: This study aimed to assess the implementation of an online parent training programme in Bangladesh, designed to enhance parental knowledge of autism and neurodevelopmental disorders and related interventions. In addition, study participants were expected to become “Master Trainers” with the intention of training other parents in their local communities.

Method: This survey study assessed parental knowledge and programme effectiveness, such as potential online learning barriers, cultural sensitivities, and general course content feedback after each unit.

Results: The programme had an 81% completion rate (with parents completing all but one unit) with an average programme knowledge score of 86%. Parents felt that the course content was moderately difficult, the length of the units was appropriate, and the units were culturally sensitive. They requested more detailed lessons, specific case studies, and adaptation of the curriculum for older children.

Conclusion: The pilot programme merits the next phase of development, which includes local adaptation and translation. However, the findings are limited by the small sample size.

Public health research purports to provide the evidence base for policies, programmes and interventions to improve the health of a population. However, there is increasing awareness that the experiences of disabled people have played little part in informing this evidence base. This paper discusses one aspect of a study commissioned by England’s National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) to review the implications for public health of theories and models of disability. This part of the study focused on the development of a tool or decision aid to promote ethical inclusion of disabled people in public health randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and evaluative research. The tool was introduced at four regional ‘deliberating panels’ involving politically and socially active disabled people. In addition, we held a panel with public health professionals. The deliberation panels debated how the focus of public health was narrowing, why disability was excluded and positive and negative issues with using rights to guide research and evaluative practice. Politically active disabled people argued for a social model of human rights to guide any rights based tools or decision aids in public health and disability research.

The aim of this study was to identify key governance issues that need to be addressed to facilitate the integration of mental health services into general health care in the six participating "Emerald" countries (Ethiopia, India, Nepal, Nigeria, South Africa, and Uganda).  The study adopted a descriptive qualitative approach, using framework analysis. Purposive sampling was used to recruit a range of key informants, to ensure views were elicited on all the governance issues within the expanded framework. Key informants across the six countries included policy makers at the national level in the Department/Ministry of Health; provincial coordinators and planners in primary health care and mental health; and district-level managers of primary and mental health care services. A total of 141 key informants were interviewed across the six countries. Data were transcribed (and where necessary, translated into English) and analysed thematically using framework analysis, first at the country level, then synthesised at a cross-country level.

This action plan sets out the steps that the UK Department for International Development (DFID) will take to promote, provide and make use of their own development and humanitarian programme data which can be disaggregated on the basis of sex, age, disability status and geography (in the short term). It also has the objective to build the culture within DFID on disaggregated data, and to work with others to change the international development system on disaggregated data. A review is scheduled for 2020. Working with partners, influencing, capacity building and management information, research, analysis and reporting are outlined. Trailblazer country programmes with Bangladesh, Nepal, Zimbabwe and Rwanda are reported.

"Mental illnesses are the largest contributors to the global burden of non-communicable diseases. However, there is extremely limited access to high quality, culturally-sensitive, and contextually-appropriate mental healthcare services. This situation persists despite the availability of interventions with proven efficacy to improve patient outcomes. A partnerships network is necessary for successful program adaptation and implementation."

"As part of the QualityRights Initiative, WHO has developed a comprehensive package of training and guidance modules. The modules can be used to build capacity among mental health practitioners, people with psychosocial, intellectual and cognitive disabilities, people using mental health services, families, care partners and other supporters, NGOs, DPOs and others on how to implement a human rights and recovery approach in the area of mental health in line with the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and other international human rights standards".

Originally published at Mental Health Centre, Peshawar, 1985. Reprinted, 1997, Birmingham, UK, in revised format with minor corrections and updates. Online version, [2017 at ResearchGate],  with new introductory notes.

This paper examines with extensive documentation the theoretical and practical functioning and flaws of the WHO {World Health Organisation} Community Based Rehabilitation scheme currently  [i.e. 1985]  being field tested in a number of countries, and of the Manual Training Disabled People in the Community. The development of alternative CBR schemes in Asia, Africa and Latin America since the 1960s is outlined. It is demonstrated that the antithesis posited between 'Institution Based Rehabilitation' and 'Community Based Rehabilitation' is artificial, excluding as it does the middle ground of inexpensive, appropriate rehabilitation based at community-run neighbourhood centres. The strengths and weaknesses of neighbourhood centre based rehabilitation and the WHO‑style home‑based rehabilitation are compared, together with the many social, economic and demographic factors favouring the former approach. Cost considerations are examined in some detail. An account is given of experience in mobilising community resources for neighbourhood rehabilitation centres in Pakistan. Recommendations are made for future Community Rehabilitation plans, with emphasis on the development and dissemination of rehabilitation skills and information through appropriate media.