Search

The qualitative community embraces transparent dialogue through sharing knowledge to improve rigour and develop new initiatives. In this paper, we recognise there are many complexities within qualitative research, leading to important debates. We explore the benefits and challenges, as well as the practicalities and technicalities, of conducting research that 1) employs multiple methods within the qualitative paradigm, 2) is interdisciplinary, and 3) examines a sensitive research topic 4) with a vulnerable group of participants. Specifically, when research is also 5) cross-cultural and 6) utilises participatory techniques. Through our discussion, we draw upon an existing project and examine the complexity of designing and completing intra-paradigmatic mixed methods research with children from different sociocultural contexts, underpinned by interdisciplinary perspectives, in a complex area like mental health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Several risk factors for children's mental health and wellness have been established. These are compounded by inequalities, especially in Majority World Countries (MWC). As evidence is largely based on adult reports, we aimed to capture children's experiences of risk across five MWC resource-constrained settings (Brazil, Pakistan, Turkey, Kenya, and South Africa) during the height of COVID-19 pandemic. Participants included 36 children aged 8–10 years and 37 young people aged 14–16 years. We employed a thematic design using a participatory methodological approach in collecting data through diary entries, drawings, posters, focus groups discussions, and child-led interviews with elders. Two researchers integrated and analysed the data set through a thematic codebook framework. Three identified themes related to exacerbation of existing risks, disruption or loss of protective factors, and lack of access to structural supports. Children linked risk factors along their socioecology. The findings have implications in actively involving children as social actors in determining and addressing risk for mental health and wellness through child-centred and multi-sectoral policy and interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

\nContributions to the intergenerational field There is limited evidence on how intergenerational trauma and resilience are perceived by children, especially in Majority World Countries (MWC). We established such perspectives among 73 children and youth in Brazil, Kenya, South Africa, Pakistan and Turkey. Children interviewed older adults, kept diary fieldnotes, and shared learning in focus groups. Data were integrated through a thematic codebook. Four themes reflected deprivation of safety needs and family challenges, especially for girls, which shaped older adults’ resilience. Children related accounts to their experiences, to generate intergenerational learning. Implications of the findings are considered in the context of intercultural shared trauma and resilience. Children can draw strength from intergenerational narratives to build their resilience in the face of future adversity. The emotional impact of intergenerational narratives can have more impact on children than conveying information or advice. A multi-method approach can be adapted for different age groups to elicit intergenerational perspectives. Children can make an important contribution as co-researchers in intergenerational research. Children can draw strength from intergenerational narratives to build their resilience in the face of future adversity.The emotional impact of intergenerational narratives can have more impact on children than conveying information or advice.A multi-method approach can be adapted for different age groups to elicit intergenerational perspectives.Children can make an important contribution as co-researchers in intergenerational research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Refugee young people have high rates of unmet mental health needs. Established barriers to accessing mental health care may be contextual to the host country and its support systems. The aim of this study was to establish the perspectives of refugee young people, parents, and service providers on service responses across one middle-income and one high-income country, Turkey and the UK, respectively. In Turkey, eight professionals (social work, psychology, and education), ten parents and ten young people took part. In the UK, stakeholders included four professionals (health, educational psychology, and non-statutory), seven parents and seven young people. Data were analyzed using a codebook thematic approach. Despite structural differences between the two systems, several commonalities were identified in responses. Conceptualization of mental health, stigma, shame, and parents’ language acquisition acted as barriers to help-seeking in both countries, whilst schools were viewed as central to the initiation of interventions. Contextual barriers in Turkey included child marriage and labor, whilst reliance on non-governmental organizations (NGOs) facilitated joint care pathways. In the UK, providers aimed to adapt and extend care pathways through primary health care. Recommendations included designated policy, joint working, schools acting as service hubs, awareness, and training professionals on contextual knowledge. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Children in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) have high levels of unmet mental health needs, especially in disadvantaged communities. To address this gap, we developed a child mental health service improvement programme. This was co-facilitated using interprofessional principles and values in four countries, South Africa, Kenya, Turkey and Brazil. Eighteen stakeholders from different professions were interviewed after six months on their perspectives on enabling factors and challenges they faced in implementing service plans. Participants valued the holistic case management approach and scaled service model that underpinned the service plans. Emerging themes on participants’ priorities related to service user participation, integrated care, and different levels of capacity-building. We propose that an integrated care model in LMIC contexts can maximize available resources, engage families and mobilize communities. Implementation requires concurrent actions at micro-, meso- and macro-level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]