↓ Skip to main content

Mental illness research in the Gulf Cooperation Council: a scoping review

Overview of attention for article published in Health Research Policy and Systems, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
85 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Mental illness research in the Gulf Cooperation Council: a scoping review
Published in
Health Research Policy and Systems, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12961-016-0123-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jason E. Hickey, Steven Pryjmachuk, Heather Waterman

Abstract

Rapid growth and development in recent decades has seen mental health and mental illness emerge as priority health concerns for the Gulf Cooperation Council (Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates). As a result, mental health services in the region are being redefined and expanded. However, there is a paucity of local research to guide ongoing service development. Local research is important because service users' experience of mental illness and mental health services are linked to their sociocultural context. In order for service development to be most effective, there is a need for increased understanding of the people who use these services.This article aims to review and synthesize mental health research from the Gulf Cooperation Council. It also seeks to identify gaps in the literature and suggest directions for future research. A scoping framework was used to conduct this review. To identify studies, database searches were undertaken, regional journals were hand-searched, and reference lists of included articles were examined. Empirical studies undertaken in the Gulf Cooperation Council that reported mental health service users' experience of mental illness were included. Framework analysis was used to synthesize results. Fifty-five studies met inclusion criteria and the following themes were identified: service preferences, illness (symptomology, perceived cause, impact), and recovery (traditional healing, family support, religion). Gaps included contradictory findings related to the supportive role of the Arabic extended family and religion, under-representation of women in study samples, and limited attention on illness management outside of the hospital setting.From this review, it is clear that the sociocultural context in the region is linked to service users' experience of mental illness. Future research that aims to fill the identified gaps and develop and test culturally appropriate interventions will aid practice and policy development in the region.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 85 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 11%
Researcher 8 9%
Lecturer 5 6%
Other 18 21%
Unknown 26 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 12 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 9%
Social Sciences 7 8%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 4%
Other 14 16%
Unknown 29 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 October 2017.
All research outputs
#6,678,815
of 24,654,416 outputs
Outputs from Health Research Policy and Systems
#781
of 1,322 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#108,295
of 375,350 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Research Policy and Systems
#12
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,654,416 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,322 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.9. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 375,350 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.