The aim of this study was to determine possible differences in psychiatric care contact and the type of contact in the year prior to suicide by migrant status and region of origin compared to Swedish persons.

A population-based open cohort design, using linked national registers, to study all individuals aged 20–64 years who died by suicide between 1 January 2006 and 31 December 2016 in Sweden (N = 12 474). The primary exposure was migrant status compared to the Swedish majority population in the following categories: non-refugee migrants, refugee migrants and children of migrants. The secondary exposure was region of origin in seven regions: Sweden, other Nordic countries, Europe, Sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East and North Africa, Asia, the Americas and Oceania. The four outcomes were psychiatric in- and outpatient care, prescribed and purchased psychotropic medication and a variable composing the other variables, all measured the year before death. Logistic regression models adjusted for age, sex, income and marital status estimated the likelihood of psychiatric care utilisation by type of care within the year prior to death by migrant status and region of origin (individually and combined).

Out of all who had died by suicide, 81% had had psychiatric care of any type in the year before death by suicide. Among refugees the prevalence of psychiatric care before death by suicide was 88%. Compared with the Swedish reference group, non-refugees and persons from Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa had a lower likelihood of utilising psychiatric care prior to suicide driven by a lower use of prescribed psychotropic medication. Persons from the Middle East and North Africa had a higher likelihood, driven by higher use of psychiatric outpatient care and prescribed psychotropic medication. Non-refugees' likelihood of utilising care before death by suicide was lower within the first 5 years of living in Sweden.

A large share of those who die by suicide use psychiatric care the year before they die. Non-refugee migrants and persons from Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa have a lower likelihood of utilising psychiatric care prior to suicide compared to Swedish, whereas persons from the Middle East and North Africa have a higher likelihood. Health care and policy makers should consider both migrant status, region of origin and time in the new country for further suicide prevention efforts.

Although of great value to understand the treatment results for mental health problems obtained in clinical practice, studies using naturalistic data from children and adolescents seeking clinical care because of complex mental health problems are limited. Cross-national comparison of naturalistic outcomes in this population is seldomly done. Although careful consideration is needed, such comparisons are likely to contribute to an open dialogue about cross-national differences and may stimulate service improvement. The aim of this observational study is to investigate clinical characteristics and outcomes in naturalistic cohorts of specialized child and adolescent mental health outpatient care in two different countries.

Routinely collected data from 2013 to 2018 of 2715 outpatients in the Greater Area of Brisbane, Australia (CYMHS) and 1158 outpatients in Leiden, the Netherlands (LUMC-Curium) were analysed. Demographics, clinical characteristics and severity of problems at start and end of treatment were described, using Children's Global Assessment Scale (CGAS), Health of the Nation Outcome Scales for Children and Adolescents (HoNOSCA) and the parental Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ-P).

Routine outcome measures (CGAS, HoNOSCA, SDQ-P) showed moderate to severe mental health problems at start of treatment, which improved significantly over time in both cohorts. Effect sizes ranged between 0.73-0.90 (CYMHS) and 0.57-0.76 (LUMC-Curium). While internalizing problems (mood disorder, anxiety disorder and stress-related disorder) were more prevalent at CYMHS, externalizing developmental problems (ADHD, autism) prevailed at LUMC-Curium. Comorbidity (>1 diagnosis on ICD10/DSM-IV) was relatively similar: 45% at CYMHS and 39 % at LUMC-Curium. In both countries, improvement of functioning was lowest for conduct disorder and highest for somatoform/conversion disorders and obsessive-compulsive disorders (OCD). Overall, 20-40% showed clinically significant improvement (shift from clinical-range at start to a non-clinical-range at the end of treatment), but nearly half of patients still experienced significant symptoms at discharge.

This large-scale outcome study showed both cohorts from Australia and the Netherlands improve during the course of treatment on clinician- and parent-reported measures. Although samples were situated within different contexts and differed in patient profiles, they showed similar trends in improvement per diagnostic group. While 20-40% showed clinically significant change, many patients experienced residual symptoms reflecting increased risk for negative outcome into adulthood. We emphasize cross-national comparison of naturalistic outcomes faces challenges, although it can similarly reveal trends in treatment outcome providing direction for future research: what factors determine discharge from specialized services; and how to improve current treatments in this severely affected population.

Despite recent global attention to mental health and psychosocial support services and a growing body of evidence-support interventions, few mental health services have been established at a regional or national scale in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). There are myriad challenges and barriers ranging from testing interventions that do not target priority needs of populations or policymakers to interventions that cannot achieve adequate coverage to decrease the treatment gap in LMIC.

We propose a ‘roadmap to impact’ process that guides planning for interventions to move from the research space to the implementation space.

We establish four criteria and nine associated indicators that can be evaluated in low-resource settings to foster the greatest likelihood of successfully scaling mental health and psychosocial interventions. The criteria are relevance (indicators: population need, cultural and contextual fit), effectiveness (change in mental health outcome, change in hypothesised mechanism of action), quality (adherence, competence, attendance) and feasibility (coverage, cost). In the research space, relevance and effectiveness need to be established before moving into the implementation space. In the implementation space, ongoing monitoring of quality and feasibility is required to achieve and maintain a positive public health impact. Ultimately, a database or repository needs to be developed with these criteria and indicators to help researchers establish and monitor minimum benchmarks for the indicators, and for policymakers and practitioners to be able to select what interventions will be most likely to succeed in their settings.

A practicable roadmap with a sequence of measurable indicators is an important step to delivering interventions at scale and reducing the mental health treatment gap around the world.

High heterogeneity was found in the prevalence rates of mental disorders in adult asylum seekers and refugees in high-income countries. This may be related to different problems. Among them, there is a changing exposure to risk and protective factors for mental health at different phases of these people's life before migration, and during the migratory journey and resettlement. This study aimed at identifying and distinguishing time points in which distinct risk and protective factors for the mental health of asylum seekers and refugees may occur.

Systematic review and narrative synthesis. A systematic search was carried out for the period January 2017–August 2019, given the existence of systematic reviews of the evidence up to January 2017.

Two hundred and fifty-two studies were identified with our search and 31 studies were included. The critical time points identified are: (a) before the travel; (b) during the travel; (c) at initial settlement in the host country; (d) when attempting to integrate in the host country; (e) when the immigration status is challenged or revoked. Some factors such as sense of belonging in the host country can be risk factors or protective factors depending on the time point.

These five critical time points can guide the development and selection of well-timed preventive and treatment interventions. They could also be used to stratify samples in epidemiological studies and meta-analyses. At present, we know much more on risk factors than on protective factors. Knowing more about protective factors may inform the development of interventions to foster them.

The UK has one of the largest systems of immigration detention in Europe.. Those detained include asylum-seekers and foreign national prisoners, groups with a higher prevalence of mental health vulnerabilities compared with the general population. In light of little published research on the mental health status of detainees in immigration removal centres (IRCs), the primary aim of this study was to explore whether it was feasible to conduct psychiatric research in such a setting. A secondary aim was to compare the mental health of those seeking asylum with the rest of the detainees.

Cross-sectional study with simple random sampling followed by opportunistic sampling. Exclusion criteria included inadequate knowledge of English and European Union nationality. Six validated tools were used to screen for mental health disorders including developmental disorders like Personality Disorder, Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), Autistic Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and Intellectual Disability, as well as for needs assessment. These were the MINI v6, SAPAS, AQ-10, ASRS, LDSQ and CANFOR. Demographic data were obtained using a participant demographic sheet. Researchers were trained in the use of the screening battery and inter-rater reliability assessed by joint ratings.

A total of 101 subjects were interviewed. Overall response rate was 39%. The most prevalent screened mental disorder was depression (52.5%), followed by personality disorder (34.7%) and post-traumatic stress disorder (20.8%). 21.8% were at moderate to high suicidal risk. 14.9 and 13.9% screened positive for ASD and ADHD, respectively. The greatest unmet needs were in the areas of intimate relationships (76.2%), psychological distress (72.3%) and sexual expression (71.3%). Overall presence of mental disorder was comparable with levels found in prisons. The numbers in each group were too small to carry out any further analysis.

It is feasible to undertake a psychiatric morbidity survey in an IRC. Limitations of the study include potential selection bias, use of screening tools, use of single-site study, high refusal rates, the lack of interpreters and lack of women and children in study sample. Future studies should involve the in-reach team to recruit participants and should be run by a steering group consisting of clinicians from the IRC as well as academics.