Search

Objective: This study examined differences in the types of mental health research that were conducted in the states and territories of Australia in 2008. Differences in both the disorder focus (e.g. depression, psychosis) and goal or methodology (e.g. epidemiological, biological) of published papers were examined. The structural differences underlying research output were examined by comparing output with funding and research infrastructure.Method: A random sample of 1008 Australian-authored mental health research publications and all 126 competitive mental-health related research grants from 2008 were coded in terms of their state or territory of origin, disorder focus and research goal.Results: Victoria and the Australian Capital Territory had the highest per capita rates of mental health research publications in 2008, while Tasmania and the Northern Territory had less per capita output. Research in New South Wales had greater focus on substance use and anxiety disorders, while Victoria was dominant in research on affective disorders and psychosis. Research in Queensland and Western Australia was broader in scope. Research output was more closely linked with number of successful grants than amount of funding.Conclusions: State and territory support for mental health research may have important implications for research output. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Consumer involvement in mental health research is considered both a right and a benefit, despite the identified barriers to forming effective collaborative relationships. The purpose of this paper is to examine the literature relating to consumer involvement in mental health research with a view to articulating a model to guide this process. Method: A qualitative review of the relevant literature was undertaken. Literature referring to consumer roles in research was accessed and reviewed with the aim of articulating the benefits of, and barriers to, consumer participation in research. Results: The literature has identified a number of important benefits and some significant barriers to consumer involvement in mental health research. However, a clear model to articulate definitions of involvement is lacking. Four distinct levels of involvement were articulated. Conclusions: The identification of clearly defined models for consumer involvement in mental health research is important in order to facilitate collaboration and avoid tokenism. Research is required in order to determine the applicability of these models within actual research projects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To provide an example of one model of research capacity building for mental health from a remote setting in Solomon Islands.Methods: The Atoifi Health Research Group is building health research capacity with a health service on the remote east coast of Malaita, Solomon Islands. The group uses a 'learn-by-doing' approach embedded in health service and community-level health projects. The group is eclectic in nature and deliberately engages a variety of partners to discover culturally informed methods of collecting, analysing and disseminating research findings.Results: Key successes of the Atoifi Health Research Group are: that it was initiated by Solomon Islanders with self-expressed desire to learn about research; the learn-by-doing model; inclusion of community people to inform questions and socio-cultural appropriateness; and commitment to ongoing support by international researchers.Conclusions: Given different social, cultural, economic, geographic, spiritual and service contexts across the Pacific, locally appropriate approaches need to be considered. Such approaches challenge the orthodox approach of centralized investment to replicate specialist driven approaches of funder nations. Increasing expertise at all levels through participatory capacity building models that define and address local problems may be more sustainable and responsive to local mental health contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]