Search

Background: There is strong evidence that collaborative practice in mental healthcare improves outcomes for patients. The concept of collaborative practice can include collaboration between healthcare workers of different professional backgrounds and collaboration with patients, families and communities. Most models of collaborative practice were developed in Western and high-income countries and are not easily translatable to settings which are culturally diverse and lower in resources. This project aimed to develop a set of recommendations to improve collaborative practice in Malaysia. Methods: In the first phase, qualitative research was conducted to better understand collaboration in a psychiatric hospital (previously published). In the second phase a local hospital level committee from the same hospital was created to act on the qualitative research and create a set of recommendations to improve collaborative practice at the hospital for the hospital. Some of these recommendations were implemented, where feasible and the outcomes discussed. These recommendations were then sent to a nationwide Delphi panel. These committees consisted of healthcare staff of various professions, patients and carers. Results: The Delphi panel reached consensus after three rounds. The recommendations include ways to improve collaborative problem solving and decision making in the hospital, ways to improve the autonomy and relatedness of patients, carers and staff and ways to improve the levels of resources (e.g. skills training in staff, allowing people with lived experience of mental disorder to contribute). Conclusions: This study showed that the Delphi method is a feasible method of developing recommendations and guidelines in Malaysia and allowed a wider range of stakeholders to contribute than traditional methods of developing guidelines and recommendations. Trial registration Registered in the National Medical Research Register, Malaysia, NMRR-13-308-14792 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Social media has become a useful tool for learning and teaching due to its functions for knowledge sharing, such as documents exchange, virtual communication, and knowledge formation. Higher education institutions (HEIs) that recognise the value of social media and the importance of individual motivation have sought to encourage its use to bolster learning performance. Using social cognitive theory and connectivism theory, we developed a model that theorises the influence of social media and individual motivation (reputation and altruism) on knowledge sharing and learning performance among students in higher education. To test the model, we employed covariance-based structural equation modelling (CB SEM) on survey data that was collected using questionnaires from 407 students enrolled in the top 10 private universities in West Malaysia. Congruently, we established the utility of the Heterotrait-Monotrait (HTMT) ratio (which was traditionally confined to variance-based or partial least squares SEM) as a discriminant validity measure for CB SEM. As a result, our study empirically evidences that social media functions (documents exchange, virtual communication, and knowledge formation) and individual motivation (reputation) are core factors that HEIs can leverage to encourage knowledge sharing and improve learning performance among tertiary students. The paper concludes with a discussion of its implications, limitations, and future research directions. • Social media positively enhances students' knowledge sharing. • Social media positively influences students' learning performance. • Reputation positively influences knowledge sharing behaviour. • Document exchange is a key driver of students' learning performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A better understanding is needed about how people make decisions about help seeking. Materials: Focus group and individual interviews with patients, carers, healthcare staff, religious authorities, traditional healers and community members. Discussion: Four stages of help seeking were identified: (1) noticing symptoms and initial labelling, (2) collective decision-making, (3) spiritual diagnoses and treatment and (4) psychiatric diagnosis and treatment. Conclusion: Spiritual diagnoses have the advantage of being less stigmatising, giving meaning to symptoms, and were seen to offer hope of cure rather than just symptom control. Patients and carers need help to integrate different explanatory models into a meaningful whole. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]