↓ Skip to main content

Community based system dynamic as an approach for understanding and acting on messy problems: a case study for global mental health intervention in Afghanistan

Overview of attention for article published in Conflict and Health, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (59th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
6 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
116 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
Community based system dynamic as an approach for understanding and acting on messy problems: a case study for global mental health intervention in Afghanistan
Published in
Conflict and Health, November 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13031-016-0089-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jean-Francois Trani, Ellis Ballard, Parul Bakhshi, Peter Hovmand

Abstract

Afghanistan lacks suitable specialized mental healthcare services despite high prevalence of severe mental health disorders which are aggravated by the conflict and numerous daily stressors. Recent studies have shown that Afghans with mental illness are not only deprived of care but are vulnerable in many other ways. Innovative participatory approaches to the design of mental healthcare policies and programs are needed in such challenging context. We employed community based system dynamics to examine interactions between multiple factors and actors to examine the problem of persistently low service utilization for people with mental illness. Group model building sessions, designed based on a series of scripts and led by three facilitators, took place with NGO staff members in Mazar-I-Sharif in July 2014 and in Kabul in February 2015. We identified major feedback loops that constitute a hypothesis of how system components interact to generate a persistently low rate of service utilization by people with mental illness. In particular, we found that the interaction of the combined burdens of poverty and cost of treatment interact with cultural and social stigmatizing beliefs, in the context of limited clinical or other treatment support, to perpetuate low access to care for people with mental disorders. These findings indicate that the introduction of mental healthcare services alone will not be sufficient to meaningfully improve the condition of individuals with mental illness if community stigma and poverty are not addressed concurrently. Our model highlights important factors that prevent persons with mental illness from accessing services. Our study demonstrates that group model building methods using community based system dynamics can provide an effective tool to elicit a common vision on a complex problem and identify shared potential strategies for intervention in a development and global health context. Its strength and originality is the leadership role played by the actors embedded within the system in describing the complex problem and suggesting interventions.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 116 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Malaysia 1 <1%
Unknown 115 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 29 25%
Researcher 20 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 6%
Student > Postgraduate 6 5%
Other 16 14%
Unknown 18 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 20 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 15%
Psychology 15 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 9%
Decision Sciences 4 3%
Other 25 22%
Unknown 24 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 14 March 2017.
All research outputs
#1,178,397
of 14,226,972 outputs
Outputs from Conflict and Health
#117
of 324 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,346
of 379,987 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Conflict and Health
#13
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,226,972 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 324 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its peers.
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 379,987 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 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 59% of its contemporaries.