ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: This case study describes research, which is located in Turkey, where more than 750,000 Syrian refugees reside autonomously in Istanbul. The research developed and pilot tested a novel model for helping urban refugee families with limited to no access to evidence-based mental health services, by delivering a transdiagnostic family intervention for common mental disorders in health and non-health sector settings using a task-sharing approach. This case study addresses the following question: What challenges were encountered in developing and piloting a low intensity trans-diagnostic family support intervention in a humanitarian emergency setting? DISCUSSION: The rapidly growing scale of humanitarian crises requires new response capabilities geared towards addressing populations with prolonged high vulnerability to mental health consequences and limited to no access to mental health, health, and social resources. The research team faced multiple challenges in conducting this research in a humanitarian emergency setting including: 1) Non-existent or weak partnerships geared towards mental health research in a humanitarian emergency; 2) Lack of familiarity with task-sharing; 3). Insufficient language and cultural competency; 3) Fit with families' values and demands; 4) Hardships of urban refugees. Through the research process, the research team learned lessons concerning: 1) building a coalition of academic and humanitarian organization partners; 2) investing in the research capacity building of local researchers and partners; 3) working in a community-collaborative and multi-disciplinary approach. CONCLUSION: Conducting research in humanitarian emergency settings calls for innovative collaborative and multidisciplinary approaches to understanding and addressing many sociocultural, contextual, practical and scientific challenge.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) project presents innovative ways of investigating mental illness based on behavioral and neurobiological measures of dimensional processes. Although cultural psychiatrists have critiqued RDoC's implications and limitations for its under-developed focus on context and experience, RDoC presents opportunities for synergies with global mental health. It can capture aspects of clinical or sub-clinical behavior which are less dependent upon Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.; DSM-5) and perhaps better elucidate the role of culture in disease expression and resilience. Aim/Results: This article uses the example of migration to describe several starting points for new research: (1) providing components for building an investigable conceptual framework to understand individual's mental health, resilience and adjustment to migration challenges or social adversities in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and (2) identifying measurable factors which determine resilience or vulnerability, to guide development and evaluation of targeted prevention, treatment and recovery strategies for mental health in LMICs. CONCLUSION: In such ways, RDoC frameworks could help put the new cutting edge neurobiological dimensional scientific advances in a position to contribute to addressing mental health problems amid social adversities in LMICs. However, this would require a much-expanded commitment by both RDoC and global mental health researchers to address contextual and experiential dimensions.