Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T04:17:08.647Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Mental health research in South America: Psychiatrists and psychiatry trainees’ perceived resources and barriers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 October 2023

Rodrigo Ramalho*
Affiliation:
Department of Social and Community Health, School of Population Health, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
Vanessa Chappe
Affiliation:
Administración de los Servicios de Salud del Estado (ASSE), Montevideo, Uruguay
Lisette Alvarez
Affiliation:
Hospital Regional Daniel Alcides Carrión, Cerro de Pasco, Perú
Gianfranco C.A. Argomedo-Ramos
Affiliation:
Facultad de Medicina de la Universidad Nacional de Trujillo, Trujillo, Perú
Guillermo Rivera Arroyo
Affiliation:
Deparment of Psychology, Universidad Privada de Santa Cruz de la Sierra, Santa Cruz, Bolivia
Graciela L. Bonay
Affiliation:
Private Practice, Rosario, Argentina
Javiera C. Libuy Mena
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, School of Medicine, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile
Miguel A. Cuellar Hoppe
Affiliation:
Centro integral de Neurociencias, Asunción – Paraguay, Asunción, Paraguay
Domenica N. Cevallos-Robalino
Affiliation:
Epidemiology and Public Health, UASB, Quito, Ecuador
Jairo M. Gonzalez-Diaz
Affiliation:
UR Center for Mental Health – CeRSaMe, School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universidad del Rosario, Bogotá, Colombia
*
Corresponding author: Rodrigo Ramalho; Email: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

As mental health issues continue to rise in Latin America, the need for research in this field becomes increasingly pressing. This study aimed to explore the perceived barriers and resources for research and publications among psychiatrists and psychiatry trainees from nine Spanish-speaking countries in South America. Data was collected through an anonymous online survey and analyzed using descriptive methods and the SPSS Statistical package. In total, 214 responses were analyzed. Among the participating psychiatrists, 61.8% reported having led a research project and 74.7% of them reported having led an academic publication. As for the psychiatry trainees, 26% reported having conducted research and 41.5% reported having published or attempted to publish an academic paper. When available, having access to research training, protected research time and mentorship opportunities were significant resources for research. Further support is needed in terms of funding, training, protected research time and mentorship opportunities. However, despite their efforts to participate in the global mental health discussion, Latin American psychiatrists and psychiatry trainees remain largely underrepresented in the literature.

Topics structure

Type
Research Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press

Impact statement

Even though mental health issues continue to rise in Latin America, the region remains constantly underrepresented in the global mental health discussion. In this article, we discuss the barriers to and resources for research and research dissemination, as reported by psychiatrists and psychiatry trainees from nine Spanish-speaking South American countries. Our findings highlight how access to research training, mentorship opportunities and protected research time are significant resources when available. At the same time, our results show how lack of funding, protected research time, research training and mentorship opportunities are prevalent barriers in the region, all of which have a significant impact on research endeavors. Despite the lack of resources, Latin American psychiatrists and psychiatry trainees are keen to participate in the global mental health discussion and appear to be taking active steps toward doing so. However, further support is needed to ensure the production, dissemination and translation of research that will help meet the region’s mental health needs.

Introduction

Mental health is a rapidly evolving field that relies on research and research dissemination to inform care and policy needs, as well as to develop innovative and cost-effective individual and public health responses. However, conducting research in mental health is often not without its challenges, particularly in low- and middle-income countries, where resources for research are often scarce.

In Latin America, the growing burden of mental health disorders (Kohn et al., Reference Kohn, Levav, De Almeida, Vicente, Andrade, Caraveo-Anduaga, Saxena and Saraceno2005; Caldas de Almeida and Horvitz-Lennon, Reference Caldas de Almeida and Horvitz-Lennon2010) is mirrored by an equally growing and urgent need for mental health-related research in the region (Alarcon, Reference Alarcon2003). Latin America has remained largely underrepresented in the global mental health-related literature. In 2010, Gallo and Tohen (Reference Gallo and Tohen2010) reported that Latin America contributed only 2% of the world’s mental health literature. During the COVID-19 pandemic, Akintunde et al. (Reference Akintunde, Musa, Musa, Musa, Chen, Ibrahim, Tassang and Helmy2021) found a growing contribution to this literature from numerous countries around the world, including Latin American countries. However, Yalcin et al. (Reference Yalcin, Bayraktar, Karabulut, de Filippis, Jaguga, Karaliuniene, Nagendrappa, Noel, Ojeahere, Ori, Ransing, Saeed, Shalbafan, Shoib, Ullah, Vadivel, Vahdani and Ramalho2022) reported that only about 4% of this literature was led by authors from Latin America and the Caribbean.

Previous authors have highlighted the need for further mental health-related research in Latin America (Razzouk et al., Reference Razzouk, Gallo, Olifson, Zorzetto, Fiestas, Poletti, Mazzoti, Levav and Mari2008; Kohn et al., Reference Kohn, Ali, Puac-Polanco, Figueroa, López-Soto, Morgan, Saldivia and Vicente2018). Addressing existing gaps is essential to promote mental health and well-being in the region. However, it is important first to understand what has hindered mental health research in Latin America and identify potential strategies to overcome these obstacles. Responding to this need, the present study aimed to explore the barriers and resources for research and publications among psychiatrists and psychiatry trainees in nine South American countries.

Methods

This was a cross-sectional descriptive observational study conducted in August 2021. The research team comprised psychiatrists and psychiatry trainees from nine countries in South America, namely Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Paraguay, Perú, Uruguay and Venezuela. Informed by a literature review, the research team developed an online anonymous survey using Qualtrics. The survey was developed in Spanish and comprised three main sections: demographic data, barriers and resources for research and barriers to publication. The sections on barriers and resources for research and barriers to publication presented participants with a list of options and asked them to select the one/s that applied to them. It also offered participants the possibility to add to the list via free text.

An invitation to participate in the study with a hyperlink to the survey was distributed among the research team’s professional networks via email and social media. Psychiatrists and psychiatry trainees working or studying in Spanish-speaking South American countries, that is, Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay and Venezuela, were invited to participate. No exclusion criteria were used. Ethical approval was obtained from the Clínica Nuestra Señora de la Paz’s Ethics Committee, Bogota, Colombia, on July 14, 2021. The first page of the survey asked participants to consent to the study before accessing the survey and provided additional information about the study, including the first author’s contact information. Data collection occurred between August 1, 2021, and September 1, 2021. The collected data was stored in the Qualtrics software, which provided an initial descriptive analysis. The data was further analyzed using the SPSS v.25 program for Windows. The relationships between categorical variables were tested using bivariate analysis with a chi-square test, with a p-value < 0.05 accepted as significant. Several logistic regression models were performed independently for psychiatrists and psychiatry trainees. In these models, participation in scientific publications (for both groups) and scientific research in general (for psychiatrists) were explored as independent variables controlled by explanatory covariates that had shown a statistically significant association in the bivariate analyses. Even though gender did not show a statistically significant relationship in the bivariate analysis, we included it in the logistic regression models given its known impact on science representation.

Results

A total of 214 responses were analyzed. Table 1 presents the demographic characteristics of the total sample. Most participating psychiatrists were female, between 31 and 40 years old, and held their specialization as their highest academic degree. The countries with the most representation of psychiatrists were Uruguay, Venezuela and Bolivia, comprising about three-quarters of the total sample of psychiatrists. Most psychiatrists (n = 47; 27.2%) reported having 1–5 years of working experience as psychiatrists (vs. n = 41; 23.7% with >25 years; n = 30; 17.3% with 6–10 years; n = 20; 11.6% with 11–15 years; n = 18; 10.4% with 16–20 years and n = 17; 9.8% with 21–25 years of working experience).

Table 1. Demographic characteristics

Similarly, most participating psychiatry trainees were also female, between 31 and 40 years old, and most of them held medical doctor degrees as their highest academic degree. The countries with the most representation of psychiatry trainees were Uruguay, Peru and Argentina, comprising about half of the total sample. Most psychiatry trainees reported studying at a public university (n = 33; 80.5% vs. n = 8; 19.5% in private universities). Overall, four of the nine participating countries – Uruguay, Venezuela, Peru and Bolivia – contributed with slightly over three-quarters of the total sample of psychiatrists and psychiatry trainees. Similarly, about 66% of the total sample self-identified as female.

When asked whether conducting research in psychiatry is important, most psychiatrists (n = 165; 95.4%) and psychiatry trainees (n = 38; 92.7%) responded affirmatively. More than half of the total samples of psychiatrists and psychiatry trainees reported having received research training, mainly at a postgraduate level (see Table 2). More than half of the total sample of psychiatrists (61.8%) reported having conducted a research project, versus 26.8% of psychiatry trainees. Additionally, 59.8% of those psychiatrists who conducted research reported having led it, versus 12.2% of psychiatry trainees. About three-quarters of the psychiatrists who reported having led a research project did so without financial support. Practically half of the total sample of psychiatrists reported having published an article in an academic journal, mainly as a first, last or corresponding author. On the other hand, more than half of the total sample of psychiatry trainees reported not having published an article in an academic journal.

Table 2. Research and publishing experience

Table 3 shows barriers to and resources for research and barriers to publishing. When exploring available resources for research, we found that a third of the sample reported time as an available resource, while a minority of participants reported financial support. The main barriers to research were lack of incentives or recognition, lack of financial support and lack of time. The main barriers to publishing were lack of time, financial support and mentorship.

Table 3. Resources for and barriers to research and publication

Among the psychiatrists, research training was significantly higher in participants who had conducted a research project (χ² = 4.554; p = 0.024) and in those who had led a research project (χ² = 12.680; p < 0.001). Regarding available resources for research, a statistically significant relationship was found between having conducted research and having had time to conduct research (χ² = 3.853; p = 0.035) and mentorship (χ² = 4.532; p = 0.024). Likewise, several barriers to research showed a statistically significant relationship with this same outcome, namely: lack of time to research or publish (χ² = 5.212; p = 0.016; χ² = 10.151; p = 0.001) and lack of financial resources for research or publishing (χ² = 4.302; p = 0.028; χ² = 3.331; p = 0.048). Those who had conducted research projects had also participated in scientific publications (χ² = 25.092; p < 0.001). On the other hand, lack of interest (χ² = 5.581; p = 0.019), difficulties in choosing a scientific journal (χ² = 3.566; p = 0.042), lack of mentoring for scientific publications (χ² = 3.325; p = 0.048) and lack of funding to publish (χ² = 7.385; p = 0.005) constituted the main barriers to participate in scientific publications.

Two logistic regression models were carried out (Table 4), including all the variables that showed a statistically significant relationship with the dependent variables “Having conducted research” and “Scientific publications” (which included having published and having attempted to publish). In the first case, it was found that lack of financial resources was a barrier to conducting research (p = 0.013, ORadjusted = 2.080, 95% CI 1.167–3.706). On the other hand, having conducted research was the main factor related to having published or attempted to publish (p = 0.033, ORadjusted = 0.431, 95% CI 0.198–0.935). In neither of the two cases, gender was found to have an impact on the findings (p > 0.05, ORadjusted = 0.863, 95% CI 0.435–1.713 and p > 0.05, ORadjusted = 0.723, 95% CI 0.344–1.519).

Table 4. Logistic regression models for carrying out research as a psychiatrist, publishing as a psychiatrist and publishing as a psychiatry trainee

ORa, OR adjusted; SE, standard error.

Among psychiatry trainees, a statistically significant relationship was only found between having published or attempted to publish and two barriers to publication: limited knowledge of English (χ² = 4.490; p = 0.035) and lack of funding (χ² = 6.470; p = 0.012). A logistic regression model was performed (Table 4), including the two variables that showed a statistically significant relationship with the dependent variable “Scientific publications” (which included having published or attempted to publish). It was found that the lack of funding for publication was the main barrier to scientific publications (p = 0.025, ORadjusted = 0.076, 95% CI 0.008–0.722). In this case, gender also did not show a statistically significant relationship with the dependent variable of interest (p > 0.05, ORadjusted = 0.158, 95% CI 0.014–1.776).

Discussion

As mental health issues continue to rise in Latin America, the need for research and innovation in the region becomes more pressing. The present study explored barriers and resources for research and research dissemination among psychiatrists and psychiatry trainees in Spanish-speaking countries in South America. Most participating psychiatrists reported having conducted research, with more than half reporting having led a research project. Similarly, most participating psychiatrists reported having published in academic journals, with about three-quarters reporting having led a publication. Having carried out research projects was significantly associated with having received research training, having time to research, and having mentorships as available resources. Additionally, participating in research was the main factor related to having published or attempted to publish. Lack of funding was one of the main barriers to research and publications.

Latin American psychiatrists seem to be conducting and leading research and academic publications. However, authors like Gallo and Tohen (Reference Gallo and Tohen2010) and Yalcin et al. (Reference Yalcin, Bayraktar, Karabulut, de Filippis, Jaguga, Karaliuniene, Nagendrappa, Noel, Ojeahere, Ori, Ransing, Saeed, Shalbafan, Shoib, Ullah, Vadivel, Vahdani and Ramalho2022) found that Latin American researchers remain largely underrepresented in the global mental health literature. It is relevant to notice that both Gallo and Tohen and Yalcin and colleagues’ studies focused on publications made in the English language. So, while Latin American psychiatrists appear to be contributing to the mental health literature, they are likely relying on international collaborations when publishing in English, although not as leading authors (Grácio et al., Reference Grácio, de Oliveira, Chinchilla-Rodríguez and Moed2020).

Participants reported various barriers to conducting research and publishing in academic journals. Lack of financial support, incentives or recognition and protected research time were the main barriers to research among participating psychiatrists and psychiatry trainees. Similarly, lack of financial support, time and mentorship – particularly for psychiatry trainees – were reported as the main barriers to publishing in academic journals. Limited English proficiency was also a barrier to publishing. As previous authors have suggested, language may act as a multilevel barrier in mental health research (Ransing et al., Reference Ransing, Vadivel, Halabi, Jatchavala, Shalbafan, Noël, Noor, Yee, Gurcan and Ramalho2023). That is, non-English speaking researchers may face barriers not only at a dissemination level but also in terms of accessing research resources, such as screening tools and assessment batteries.

Lack of funding for mental health is a significant challenge in many Latin American countries (Rodríguez, Reference Rodríguez2010; Caldas de Almeida, Reference Caldas de Almeida2013), and health research has been traditionally underfunded in the region (Moloney, Reference Moloney2009). Many countries in the region often have limited budgets for healthcare, and mental health is, in many cases, even further underfunded. This very often translates into psychiatrists having limited resources to conduct research, including time as a resource. Plus, the urgency and severity of regional or national mental health needs often demand psychiatrists to prioritize providing clinical care over research.

Only about a quarter of psychiatry trainees reported having conducted research, and less than half reported having published or attempted to publish. Our findings support the call to seek ways to increase access to training and mentorship opportunities for psychiatry trainees and early career psychiatrists (El Halabi et al., Reference El Halabi, Abbas, Adesokun, Adiukwu, Ashrafi, de Filippis, Handuleh, Jaguga, Karaliuniene, Kilic, Nagendrappa, Ojeahere, Ogunnubi, Ori, Orsolini, Pereira-Sanchez, Pinto da Costa, Ransing, Shoib, Ullah, Vadivel, Vahdani and Ramalho2021; Naskar et al., Reference Naskar, Cheung, Pinto da Costa and Ramalho2022). Mentoring relationships could prove doubly beneficial, providing both mentors and mentees with the possibility to learn and grow from each other’s strengths, talents and experiences (Ramalho et al., Reference Ramalho, Montenegro, Djordjevic, Bras, Christodoulou and Mezzich2016). Online training or mentorships could provide access to these resources when unavailable at a local or regional level (Naskar et al., Reference Naskar, Cheung, Pinto da Costa and Ramalho2022). However, if offered from outside of Latin America, participants based in Latin America should lead the focus of these programs. Mentees in Latin America should not become a resource to be utilized for the benefit of non-Latin America-focused research agendas. Peer-led learning models could also provide psychiatry trainees and early career psychiatrists opportunities to collaborate in training, research projects and research dissemination (Ransing et al., Reference Ransing, Pinto da Costa, Pereira-Sanchez, Adiukwu, Orsolini, Gonzalez-Diaz, Larnaout, Grandinetti, Bytyçi, Soler-Vidal, Syarif, Kundadak, Shalbafan, Nofal and Ramalho2021).

While gender did not emerge as a significant factor in the present study, it remains a critical dimension to be explored in future research endeavors. Even though Latin America is a vast and diverse region, it has a distinct cultural, social and economic context where gender dynamics may play an impactful role in research participation, career trajectories and publication opportunities for psychiatrists and psychiatry trainees of different genders. Previous authors have found that despite notable progress, there is still a lack of adequate representation of women in the field of academic psychiatry, particularly in leadership positions (Amering et al., Reference Amering, Schrank and Sibitz2011; Hart et al., Reference Hart, Frangou and Perlis2019), and Latin America is no exception (Mendlowicz et al., Reference Mendlowicz, Coutinho, Laks, Fontenelle, Valença, Berger, Figueira and de Aguiar2011; López-Bassols et al., Reference López-Bassols, Grazzi, Guillard and Salazar2018). Only by recognizing and addressing potential gender-related barriers and opportunities, we can work toward a more inclusive and robust research landscape that better serves the diverse needs of the region.

The present study provides new insights into the experiences, barriers and facilitators to research and academic publications among psychiatrists and psychiatry trainees in Spanish-speaking countries in South America. Nevertheless, the study is not without its limitations. Brazil, a country with a significant and rapidly growing contribution to the global mental health literature (Gonçalves et al., Reference Gonçalves, Kieling, Bressan, Mari and Rohde2009; Moreira-Almeida et al., Reference Moreira-Almeida, Oliveira and Oliveira2017), was not included. Also, data collection lasted just one month, which very likely prevented a greater sample size from the included countries. Plus, the studied sample does not constitute a statistically representative sample since there was no information from several other countries in the region and data from only psychiatrists and trainees who decided to participate could be included, so the inferential analyses only constitute an exploratory approach to the problem. Likewise, the Nagelkerke R 2 values in the regression models suggest that other variables not included in our analyses could have influenced Latin American psychiatrists and psychiatry trainees’ participation in research and research dissemination. Further research should aim to examine this important topic considering other potential variables and with other more robust methodological approaches.

It is important also to note that the present study was focused on psychiatrists and psychiatry trainees. Psychiatrists’ main role and contributions to the mental health field have primarily focused on clinical care and service planning and delivery (Bhugra et al., Reference Bhugra, Kuzman, Ikkos, Hermans, Beezhold, Falkai, Fiorillo, Till, Musalek, Dales, Hoschl, Rossler, Racetovic and Gaebel2015). However, particularly in countries with fewer resources, psychiatrists are increasingly required also to adopt leadership, advocacy and public health roles (Kigozi and Ssebunnya, Reference Kigozi and Ssebunnya2014), roles that are likely also to be reflected in their research interests. Furthermore, the mental health field is complex and various other disciplines contribute to it, from primary care and nursing to anthropology and the social sciences. Future research should also pay attention to psychiatrists’ nonclinically focused contributions to the mental health field, as well as to the contributions of nonpsychiatrist researchers working in mental health. At the same time, while our quantitative findings suggest interesting alleys for future research, the present study lacked a qualitative component which could have strengthened our results. Further research on this area could benefit from incorporating a qualitative or mixed-methods approach, which would enable a more in-depth understanding of the experiences of researchers working in the mental health field in the region.

Conclusion

Psychiatrists and psychiatry trainees in Latin America are keen to contribute to the global mental health discussion. Furthermore, they seem to be taking the necessary steps to do so. However, they remain largely underrepresented in the mental health literature. While they continue to face various barriers at a local level, such as lack of funding and protected research time, there also appear to be wider, systematic issues that need to be considered. There is an urgent need to address these barriers so that they can further contribute to the global mental health discussion and, ultimately, help improve the mental health and well-being of the population of Latin America.

Open peer review

To view the open peer review materials for this article, please visit http://doi.org/10.1017/gmh.2023.58.

Data availability statement

The authors confirm that the data supporting the findings of this study are available within the article.

Author contribution

R.R. conceptualized the article. All authors contributed to the survey design, and each one contributed to data collection in their respective countries. J.M.G. conducted the statistical analysis with the help of the SPSS Statistical package. R.R. wrote the first draft of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Financial support

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

Competing interest

The authors declare none.

References

Akintunde, TY, Musa, TH, Musa, HH, Musa, IH, Chen, S, Ibrahim, E, Tassang, AE and Helmy, MSEDM (2021) Bibliometric analysis of global scientific literature on effects of COVID-19 pandemic on mental health. Asian Journal of Psychiatry 63, 102753. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajp.2021.102753.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Alarcon, R (2003) Mental health and mental health care in Latin America. World Psychiatry 2(1), 54. Available at https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16946892 (accessed 22 August 2023).Google ScholarPubMed
Amering, M, Schrank, B and Sibitz, I (2011) The gender gap in high-impact psychiatry journals. Academic Medicine 86(8), 946952. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e3182222887.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bhugra, D, Kuzman, MR, Ikkos, G, Hermans, MM, Beezhold, J, Falkai, P, Fiorillo, A, Till, A, Musalek, M, Dales, J, Hoschl, C, Rossler, W, Racetovic, G and Gaebel, W (2015) EPA guidance on the role and responsibilities of psychiatrists. European Psychiatry 30(3), 417422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caldas de Almeida, JM (2013) Mental health services development in Latin America and the Caribbean: Achievements, barriers and facilitating factors. International Health 5(1), 1518. https://doi.org/10.1093/inthealth/ihs013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caldas de Almeida, JM and Horvitz-Lennon, M (2010) Mental health care reforms in Latin America: An overview of mental health care reforms in Latin America and the Caribbean. Psychiatric Services 61(3), 218221. https://doi.org/10.1176/ps.2010.61.3.218.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
El Halabi, S, Abbas, Z, Adesokun, F, Adiukwu, F, Ashrafi, A, de Filippis, R, Handuleh, J, Jaguga, F, Karaliuniene, R, Kilic, O, Nagendrappa, S, Ojeahere, M, Ogunnubi, OP, Ori, D, Orsolini, L, Pereira-Sanchez, V, Pinto da Costa, M, Ransing, R, Shoib, S, Ullah, I, Vadivel, R, Vahdani, B and Ramalho, R (2021) How to overcome barriers to publication in low‐and middle‐income countries: Recommendations from early career psychiatrists and researchers from around the world. Asia‐Pacific Psychiatry 13(4), e12495. https://doi.org/10.1111/appy.12495.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gallo, C and Tohen, M (2010) Current status and future perspectives for psychiatry/mental health research in Latin America. International Review of Psychiatry 22(4), 382393. https://doi.org/10.3109/09540261.2010.500875.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gonçalves, R, Kieling, C, Bressan, R, Mari, J and Rohde, L (2009) The evaluation of scientific productivity in Brazil: An assessment of the mental health field. Scientometrics 80(2), 529537. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-008-2077-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grácio, MCC, de Oliveira, EFT, Chinchilla-Rodríguez, Z and Moed, HF (2020) Does corresponding authorship influence scientific impact in collaboration: Brazilian institutions as a case of study. Scientometrics 125(2), 13491369. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03655-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hart, KL, Frangou, S and Perlis, RH (2019) Gender trends in authorship in psychiatry journals from 2008 to 2018. Biological Psychiatry 86(8), 639646. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsych.2019.02.010.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kigozi, F and Ssebunnya, J (2014) The multiplier role of psychiatrists in low income settings. Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences 23(2), 123127. https://doi.org/10.1017/S2045796014000080.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kohn, R, Ali, AA, Puac-Polanco, V, Figueroa, C, López-Soto, V, Morgan, K, Saldivia, S and Vicente, B (2018) Mental health in the Americas: An overview of the treatment gap. Revista Panamericana De Salud Publica 42, e165. https://doi.org/10.26633/rpsp.2018.165.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kohn, R, Levav, I, De Almeida, JM, Vicente, B, Andrade, L, Caraveo-Anduaga, JJ, Saxena, S and Saraceno, B (2005) Mental disorders in Latin America and the Caribbean: A public health priority. Revista Panamericana De Salud Publica 18(4–5), 229240. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1020-49892005000900002.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
López-Bassols, V, Grazzi, M, Guillard, C and Salazar, M (2018) Las brechas de género en ciencia, tecnología e innovación en América Latina y el Caribe. Resultados de una recolección piloto y propuesta metodológica Para la medición. Technical Note Number IDB-TN-1408. New York: Inter-American Development Bank. https://doi.org/10.18235/0001082.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mendlowicz, MV, Coutinho, ESF, Laks, J, Fontenelle, LF, Valença, AM, Berger, W, Figueira, I and de Aguiar, GA (2011) Is there a ‘gender gap’ in authorship of the main Brazilian psychiatric journals at the beginning of the 21st century? Scientometrics 86(1), 2737. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0296-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moloney, A (2009) Latin America faces hurdles in health research. The Lancet 374(9695), 10531054. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(09)61688-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moreira-Almeida, A, Oliveira, e and Oliveira, FH (2017) A brief panorama of Brazil’s contributions to psychiatry. International Review of Psychiatry 29(3), 206207. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540261.2017.1285537.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Naskar, C, Cheung, G, Pinto da Costa, M and Ramalho, R (2022) Online academic mentoring-experiences from a virtual international exchange program for early career psychiatrists. Asian Journal of Psychiatry 78, 103287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajp.2022.103287.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ramalho, R, Montenegro, R, Djordjevic, V, Bras, M and Christodoulou, N (2016) Person-centered psychiatric education. In Mezzich, JE (ed.), Person Centered Psychiatry. Cham: Springer, pp. 539549. https//doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39724-5_39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ransing, R, Pinto da Costa, M, Pereira-Sanchez, V, Adiukwu, F, Orsolini, L, Gonzalez-Diaz, J, Larnaout, A, Grandinetti, P, Bytyçi, DG, Soler-Vidal, J, Syarif, Z, Kundadak, GK, Shalbafan, M, Nofal, M and Ramalho, R (2021) Peer learning, research, and support in times of the COVID-19 pandemic: A case study of the early career psychiatrists model. Academic Psychiatry 45(5), 613618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ransing, R, Vadivel, R, Halabi, SE, Jatchavala, C, Shalbafan, M, Noël, C, Noor, IM, Yee, A, Gurcan, A and Ramalho, R (2023) Language as multi-level barrier in health research and the way forward. Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine 45(1), 6568. https://doi.org/10.1177/02537176211052071.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Razzouk, D, Gallo, C, Olifson, S, Zorzetto, R, Fiestas, F, Poletti, G, Mazzoti, G, Levav, I and Mari, J (2008) Challenges to reduce the ‘10/90 gap’: Mental health research in Latin American and Caribbean countries. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica 118(6), 490498. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0447.2008.01242.x.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rodríguez, JJ (2010) Mental health care systems in Latin America and the Caribbean. International Review of Psychiatry 22(4), 317324. https://doi.org/10.3109/09540261.2010.500863.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yalcin, N, Bayraktar, I, Karabulut, E, de Filippis, R, Jaguga, F, Karaliuniene, R, Nagendrappa, S, Noel, C, Ojeahere, MI, Ori, D, Ransing, R, Saeed, F, Shalbafan, M, Shoib, S, Ullah, I, Vadivel, R, Vahdani, B and Ramalho, R (2022) Is everyone invited to the discussion table? A bibliometric analysis COVID-19-related mental health literature. Cambridge Prisms: Global Mental Health 9, 366374. https://doi.org/10.1017/gmh.2022.37.Google Scholar
Figure 0

Table 1. Demographic characteristics

Figure 1

Table 2. Research and publishing experience

Figure 2

Table 3. Resources for and barriers to research and publication

Figure 3

Table 4. Logistic regression models for carrying out research as a psychiatrist, publishing as a psychiatrist and publishing as a psychiatry trainee

Author comment: Mental health research in South America: Psychiatrists and psychiatry trainees’ perceived resources and barriers — R0/PR1

Comments

Dear Professor Gary Belkin,

I am pleased to submit our manuscript titled ‘Mental health research in Latin America. Barriers, resources, and recommendations’ for consideration in Global Mental Health.

Latin America remains underrepresented in the global mental health discussion. Curious about what factors could be contributing to this issue, we set up this project. We are a group of ten Latin American psychiatrists and psychiatry trainees from nine South American countries that came together for this survey project. As part of the project, we shared a survey with our colleagues from South America. The survey examined barriers to and resources for research and academic publications. Our findings highlight how having access to research training, mentorship opportunities, and protected time for research are significant resources when present. At the same time, they show how lack of funding, protected time for research, research training, and mentorship opportunities are very commonly present barriers in the region, with significant impact. In the manuscript, we discuss some key recommendations and emphasise the importance of ensuring the production, dissemination, and translation of research that will help meet the region’s mental health needs.

No funding was received for this project. The authors have no conflict of interest to disclose. We confirm that this work is original and has not been published elsewhere, nor is it currently under consideration for publication elsewhere. All authors approved the final draft and submission of the present manuscript.

We appreciate your time and consideration.

Sincerely yours,

Rodrigo Ramalho, MD, PhD

Review: Mental health research in South America: Psychiatrists and psychiatry trainees’ perceived resources and barriers — R0/PR2

Conflict of interest statement

I know four of the authors of this article, which whom I have collaborated in an international research network for some years, and I have co-authored some articles with some of them. I do not share an institutional affiliation with any of the authors, nor was aware of this research work and its submission nor had any contact with them regarding this submission nor during the review process.

Comments

This manuscript presents the results of a quantitative non-probabilistic survey of psychiatrists and psychiatric trainees in Spanish-speaking Latin American countries regarding barriers and resources for research. The survey was completed by 214 participants and identified many involved in research and publications, and most acknowledged problems including lack of funding, time, and mentorship.

I believe that the topic is of extreme relevance in global mental health, as representation and contributions from Spanish-speaking Latin America are very scarce in this research area, while the mental health needs in this part of the world are substantial. This manuscript presents a preliminary approach to investigating and addressing the issue by identifying key barriers and resources in a non-systematic approach. I believe that this manuscript is relevant and contains valuable research that is presented acknowledging its important limitations.

I have some minor comments and suggestions:

As for the title, I wonder to what extent it could be made more specific while maintaining its broader appeal and not making it too long. While the title refers to mental health research in general, this research is limited to research by psychiatrists and psychiatric trainees, which are essential but not unique actors in mental health research. In addition, the study is limited to Spanish speaking countries, which are of course majority but not the totality of Latin America. In addition, ‘recommendations’ is added to the title, although it was not part of the research survey itself - rather, recommendations by the authors are given at the discussion based on the results, as usual in research papers. My recommendation would be to make the title more specific to research by psychiatrists (and psychiatric trainees) in Spanish-speaking Latin America, and removing ‘recommendations’* from the title.

*If authors would like to give more relevance to the ‘recommendations’ section and add it to the title, details should be given in Methods as to how those recommendations were elaborated, and that part of the study should have corresponding mentions in the Introduction and Results; I understand that would be a major change, and time consuming.

It would be good to add to the Discussion some lines related to two aspects that are both limitations, recommendations for future research, and considerations. On the one hand, the fact that mental health research includes contributions from actors other than psychiatrists and psychiatric trainees (including other physicians such as primary care, public health physicians, neurologists, and other specialists and non-specialists; and more abundantly from non physician actors) - which is a limitation of this survey buyt also an opportunity for authors in this manuscript to discuss briefly why mental health research by psychiatrists and trainees is important and what is its specific role. On the other hand, the quantitative results provided by authors indicate some general themes but is not able to go deeper, for which qualitative and mixed-method studies are needed - this is both a limitation but also an opportunity for authors to discuss the way to go for future research.

Finally, I must admit that I was not able to find the manuscript tables anywhere in the journal review portal. I do not know where the problem lies but would like to take a look at those while re-reviewing the paper.

If convenient, I could also send authors through the journal editorial managers an annotated .pdf version with some language changes and suggestions - I do not see in this reviewing portal a way to add reviewing attachment files. There are some minor English language issues worth improving.

Thank you for the opportunity to review this manuscript.

Review: Mental health research in South America: Psychiatrists and psychiatry trainees’ perceived resources and barriers — R0/PR3

Conflict of interest statement

Reviewer declares none.

Comments

This is a pertinent study on an area in need of deeper explorations,and concrete improvements for Latin American psychiatry. Well conceived, comprehensive and informative, the text encompasses a number of features that are in need of substantial changes in order to improve the image of MH and psychiatric research in the sub-continent, and its visibility around the world.

This reviewer’s main observations and comments follow:

1) As Brazil is not included in the study and, yet, is probably the Latin American country with major psychiatric research, it could be convenient to include some useful information from suthorized sources (Jair Mari, Rubim de Pinho and other authors) and their impact on the whole Latin American picture.

2) Another limitation, in addition to lack of representativeness of the sample (acknowledged by the authors) is th fact that the survey lasted only one month, thus possibily depriving the authors of a greater size and more productive search of data.

3) In the Results section, it would be pertinent to comment on two interesting additional findings: the higher number of women in the sample, and the fact that only 3 of the 9 participating countries have 3/4 of the total sample; furthermore, the sample shows most psychiatrists from Peru, Argentina and Uruguay, even though it is well know that Colombia and Chila also have good number of specialists.

4) The point of higher humber of women is repeated in Resuts Section, p.4, par. 1, l. 2 and 5. The same happens with the highest number of participants coming from public universities (Sectin Results, par 1, l. 6 and par 2, l. 1. It is important to avoid text and word duplications.

5) In p. 6, par 2, l. 6 the sentence “difficullties coordinating a research time was an advantage” (for conducting research) sounds illogical, so it will have to be better explained or modified.

6) Tha last paragraph of the Discussion section could be broadened a little bit and go under the subheading of Conclusions. Similarly, the alphabetical order of the Bibliography will have to be corrected as an author starting with “A” comes after another whose name starts with a “C”.

Review: Mental health research in South America: Psychiatrists and psychiatry trainees’ perceived resources and barriers — R0/PR4

Conflict of interest statement

Reviewer declares none.

Comments

The study is focused on a relevant theme and the methods used were adequate. As recognised by the authors, the sample is not representative: some of the more productive countries in mental health-related research (e.g. Brazil and Mexico) are not included and there is a predominance of the psychiatrists with less years of working experience in psychiatry. Despite this important limitation, this is an important exploratory paper, as it gives a preliminary insight of the resources and barriers for research in mental health in countries with less resources in Latin America.

I believe that a few changes might improve the paper.

The paragraph in page 4, lines 40-49 is difficult to read. I suggest to rewrite this paragraph in a simpler and more coherent way.

I think the paragraph in Page 7, lines 29 to 52, on the contribution of papers from Latin American countries to global mental health-related literature, should be moved to the Introduction section.

I suggest to include some specific recommendations on what could specifically be done to overcome the barriers found by Psychiatry trainees.

Recommendation: Mental health research in South America: Psychiatrists and psychiatry trainees’ perceived resources and barriers — R0/PR5

Comments

Dear Authors:

Please, check the reviewers' recommendations and suggestions following each one or explaining why you do not agree with.

Also, please review the manuscript with a software for similarity (e.g. Turnitin) for checking the writing.

Thank you.

Decision: Mental health research in South America: Psychiatrists and psychiatry trainees’ perceived resources and barriers — R0/PR6

Comments

No accompanying comment.

Author comment: Mental health research in South America: Psychiatrists and psychiatry trainees’ perceived resources and barriers — R1/PR7

Comments

Dear Dr Judith Bass and Prof Andrés Fandiño-Losada,

Thank you for the opportunity to resubmit our manuscript – previously – titled ‘Mental health research in Latin America. Barriers, resources, and recommendations’ (GMH-23-0099) for consideration in Global Mental Health.

We are also grateful to the reviewers for their constructive feedback and suggestions, which have undoubtedly improved the quality of the manuscript.

Sincerely yours,

Rodrigo Ramalho

Review: Mental health research in South America: Psychiatrists and psychiatry trainees’ perceived resources and barriers — R1/PR8

Conflict of interest statement

As I think I mentioned in my first review, I know some of the authors online and have collaborated with them in some global mental health endeavors and publications, but I have no conflict of interest directly related to this manuscript (nor had any communication with the authors in these regards).

Comments

Thank you for revising your manuscript - I believe the revisions are appropriate and address the reviewers' comments (certainly mine).

I would like authors to add a mention to the logistic regression analysis at the end of Methods section, as it is lacking. I would also suggest authors to mention briefly in the discussion whether it may be worthy to incorporate stratified analysis by sex in future research - it seems that in general there are disparities in terms of academic leadership and production, and that those may be more accentuated in LMIC due to financial and/or cultural factors, and it would be interesting to explore this in Latin America.

Those are minor issues, and if the editor considers that authors should address them in another revision, I think that afterward the editor may consider making a decision without further peer review.

Review: Mental health research in South America: Psychiatrists and psychiatry trainees’ perceived resources and barriers — R1/PR9

Conflict of interest statement

No competing interests.

Comments

The changes that were made in the fist version significantly improved the paper. It is now an interesting paper that reads very well.

I just recommend to correct two minor errors:

On page 5, lines 19 - 20 ("...having 1-5 years of working experience as psychiatrists (versus n=41; n=23.7% with >25 years....") the n= before 23.7% should be deleted

On page 5, lines 47- 49 ("Most psychiatry trainees reported were studying at a public university (n=33; 80.5% versus n=8; 19.5 in private universities"), 19.5 should be followed by %.

Recommendation: Mental health research in South America: Psychiatrists and psychiatry trainees’ perceived resources and barriers — R1/PR10

Comments

Dear authors:

The reviewers have suggested methodological revisions which you should follow.

In this manner, the explanations on the logistic regressions should be improved in the methods sections, gender and Psychiatrists vs. Trainees status should be included as explanatory variables.

You should present the results of corrected logistic regressions in the results sections using the appropriate tables and descriptive texts and discuss these results in the discussion section.

Please, discuss the selection biases related with who have answered the survey and also discuss the response proportion.

Thank you.

Decision: Mental health research in South America: Psychiatrists and psychiatry trainees’ perceived resources and barriers — R1/PR11

Comments

No accompanying comment.

Author comment: Mental health research in South America: Psychiatrists and psychiatry trainees’ perceived resources and barriers — R2/PR12

Comments

Dear Dr. Judith Bass and Dr. Andrés Fandiño-Losada,

We are thankful for the opportunity to resubmit our manuscript ‘Mental health research in South America. Psychiatrists and psychiatry trainees’ perceived resources and barriers’ (GMH-23-0099.R1) for consideration in Cambridge Prisms: Global Mental Health.

We would also like to thank again the reviewers for their time and consideration. Their comments and feedback have significantly improved the quality of the manuscript.

Kind regards,

Rodrigo Ramalho

Recommendation: Mental health research in South America: Psychiatrists and psychiatry trainees’ perceived resources and barriers — R2/PR13

Comments

No accompanying comment.

Decision: Mental health research in South America: Psychiatrists and psychiatry trainees’ perceived resources and barriers — R2/PR14

Comments

No accompanying comment.