The online version of this article (https://doi.org/10.1186/s13033-018-0227-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Helen Brooks and Karen James contributed equally to this work
Indonesia has the highest rate of years of life lost to disability or early death from Schizophrenia than any other country in the world. More than 90% of people with mental illness do not get any treatment and tens of thousands of people with psychosis are illegally detained (‘pasung’) in the family home. Civic engagement, a core part of the recent World Health Organisation global strategy, has the potential to address some of these challenges through the development of person-centered models of care. The aim of the study is to develop a testable systems level, culturally appropriate, civic engagement framework for use in Jakarta and Bogor, Indonesia to strengthen local mental health services.
A mixed methods study underpinned by a realist approach will be undertaken across four phases in two study sites in Indonesia (Jakarta and Bogor). Phase 1 will explore the use of civic engagement across South East Asia by conducting a systematic review of existing evidence. By surveying 300 mental health professionals, phase 2 will identify the stakeholders, the sources of collaboration and the evidence used by professionals in decision making within local mental health systems and identify potential opportunities for civic engagement within the system. In order to explore the potential use of civic engagement within Indonesian mental health services and identify priorities for a culturally appropriate framework, phase 3 will undertake two focus groups with participants with experience of psychosis or caring for someone with psychosis (n = 20–30). Professionals and other key decision makers in a range of roles across the system at a national (n = 5) and local level (n = 10–15/site) will also take part in semi-structured interviews. Phase 4 will co-produce a civic engagement framework for use in Indonesia by synthesising evidence from phases 1–3 collaboratively with key stakeholders.
Civic engagement is a potential way in which health services in low and middle income countries can address the burden of mental health conditions through the development of person-centred models of care. However, such approaches are underexplored in Indonesia. This study will work with local stakeholders to design a testable civic engagement framework for use in mental health services in Indonesia.
Additional file 1. SPIRIT 2013 Checklist: Recommended items to address in a clinical trial protocol and related documents.
Additional file 2. Ethical approval from the University of Liverpool.
Additional file 3. Ethical approval from the University of Indonesia.
Additional file 4. Award letter from the Medical Research Council.
Murray CJL, Lopez AD. The global burden of disease: a comprehensive assessment of mortality and disability from diseases, injuries, and risk factors in 1990 and projected to 2020. Geneva and Boston: World Health Organization and Harvard School of Public Health; 1996.
Theo V, Barber R, Bell B, Bertozzi-Villa A, Biryukov S, Bolliger I, et al. Global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability for 301 acute and chronic diseases and injuries in 188 countries, 1990–2013: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013. Lancet. 2015;386(9995):743–800. CrossRef
Mathers C, Fat DM, Boerma JT. The global burden of disease: 2004 update. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2008. CrossRef
Idiani S, Prihatini S, Indrawati L, Yunita I. Psychotic and pasung in Indonesian population: a national study. Asia Pac Psychiatry. 2014;55:17.
World Health Organization. WHO global strategy on people-centred and integrated health services: interim report. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2015.
World Health Organisaiton. Community participation in local health and sustainability development: approaches and techniques. Copenhagen: WHO; 2002.
Barrett M, Zani B. Political and civic engagement: multidisciplinary perpsectives. New York: Routledge; 2015.
Faulkner A, Thomas P. User-led research and evidence-based medicine. Br J Psychiatry J Ment Sci. 2002;180:1–3. CrossRef
Kaminskiy E. The elephant in the room: a theoretical examination of power for shared decision making in psychiatric medication management. Intersect Glob J Soc Work Anal Res Polity Pract. 2015;4(2):19–38.
Thornicroft G, Tansella M. Growing recognition of the importance of service user involvement in mental health service planning and evaluation. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2005;14(1):1–3. CrossRef
Young FW. Voluntary social participation and health. Res Aging. 1998;20:339–62. CrossRef
James K, Quirk A. The rationale for shared decision making in mental heath care; systematic review of academic discourse. Ment Health Review. 2017;22(3):152–65. CrossRef
Mental Health Council of Australia and Carers Association of Australia. Carers of People with a Mental Illness Project Final Report. Commonwealth Department of Health and Aged Care; 2000.
Munro K, Killoran Ross M, Reid M. User involvement in mental health: time to face up to the challenges of meaningful involvement? Int J Ment Health Promot. 2006;8(2):37–44. CrossRef
Bowl R. Involving service users in mental health services: social services departments and the NHS and Community Care Act 1990. J Ment Health. 1996;5:287–303. CrossRef
Pawson R, Tilley N. Realistic evaluation. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 1997.
Covidence systematic review software, Veritas Health Innovation, Melbourne. http://www.covidence.org.
Snilstveit B, Oliver S, Vojtkova M. Narrative approaches to systematic review and synthesis of evidence for international development policy and practice. J Dev Eff. 2012;4(3):409–29. CrossRef
Biernacki P, Waldorf D. Snowball sampling: problems and techniques of chain referral sampling. Sociol Methods Res. 1982;10(2):141–63. CrossRef
Oliver KA, de Vocht F, Money A, Everett M. Identifying public health policymakers’ sources of information: comparing survey and network analyses. Eur J Public Health. 2017;27(suppl_2):118–23. PubMed
UCINET. Software for social network analysis. Harvard: Analytic Technologies; 2002.
Patton MQ. Qualitative research. London: Wiley; 2005. CrossRef
Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualit Res Psychol. 2006;3(2):77–101. CrossRef
NVivo qualitative data analysis Software; QSR International Pty Ltd. Version 10. 2012.
Fletcher AJ. Applying critical realism in qualitative research: methodology meets method. Int J Soc Res Methodol. 2017;20(2):181–94. CrossRef
Colucci E. Breaking the chains. Ethnographic film-making in mental health. Lancet Psychiatry. 2016;3:509–10. CrossRef
- Exploring the potential of civic engagement to strengthen mental health systems in Indonesia (IGNITE): a study protocol
- BioMed Central