Going global: do consumer preferences, attitudes, and barriers to using e-mental health services differ across countries?

BACKGROUND: e-Mental health services have the capacity to overcome barriers to care and reduce the unmet need for psychological services, particularly in developing countries. However, it is unknown how acceptable e-mental health interventions may be to these populations. AIMS: The purpose of the current study was to examine consumer attitudes and perceived barriers to e-mental health usage across four countries: Australia, Iran, the Philippines and South Africa. METHODS: An online survey was completed by 524 adults living in these countries, assessing previous contact with e-mental health services, willingness to use e-mental health services, and perceived barriers and needs for accessing e-mental health services. RESULTS: Although previous contact with e-mental health services was low, the majority of respondents in each sample reported a willingness to try e-mental health services if offered. Barriers toward e-mental health usage were higher among the developing countries than Australia. The most commonly endorsed barriers concerned needing information and assurances regarding the programmes. CONCLUSIONS: Across countries, participants indicated a willingness to use e-mental health programmes if offered. With appropriate research and careful implementation, e-mental health has the potential to be a valuable part of mental healthcare in developing countries.

Protocols for protection of human participants: a comparison of five countries.

Research ethics protocols relating to human participants were compared across five countries, namely, Australia, Azerbaijan, Iran, the Philippines, and South Africa. These countries were considered to be geographically and culturally diverse, as well as representing both developed and developing countries. The extent to which the research participant is protected across cultures and countries was investigated, with particular focus on the use of informed consent procedures. It was argued that current ethical guidelines and practices fail to ensure the protection of the most vulnerable participants within these cultures. Informed consent mechanisms also often fail to consider cultural differences in self-concept, understanding of research methods, and power differences between researchers and participants. Discussion of these ethical challenges and recommendations for research ethics development within these cultures and countries are discussed.