The mentally healthy society: The report of the taskforce on mental health in society

The Taskforce on Mental Health in Society is an independent taskforce that met from Spring 2013 to Autumn 2014. The Chair was Sir Stephen O’Brien and the Deputy Chair was Liz Meek. The Taskforce was established by Ed Miliband in his speech to the Royal College of Psychiatrists in late 2012, and was asked to set out a roadmap for how society needs to change to prevent mental health problems and promote good mental health and to look at how we can support fuller integration into the wider community of those affected by or recovering from mental health problems

A framework to support the design and cultivation of embedded research initiatives

This work was supported by the National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) Health Services & Delivery Research (HS&DR) programme under grant number 16/52/21.Background: Embedded research involves co-locating researchers within non-academic organisations to better link research and practice. Embedded research initiatives are often complex and emergent with a range of underlying intents, structures and processes. This can create tensions within initiatives and contributes to ongoing uncertainty about the most suitable designs and the effectiveness of different approaches. Aims and objectives: We aimed to devise a practical framework to support those designing and cultivating embedded research by operationalising findings from an extensive study of existing initiatives. Key conclusions: The underpinning research on embedded initiatives – a literature review and scoping exercise of initiatives in health settings across the UK – showed that such initiatives share ten common sets of concerns in relation to their intent, structure and processes. We used these insights during a co-production workshop with embedded researchers and their managers that made use of a range of creative activities. The workshop resulted in a practical framework (and associated web-based tools) that draw on the metaphor of a garden to represent the growing, emergent nature of embedded research initiatives and the active work which individuals and organisations need to put into planning and maintaining such initiatives. Each of the aspects is represented as a separate area within the garden using relevant visual metaphors. Building on this, we also present a series of reflective questions designed to facilitate discussion and debate about design features, and we link these to the wider literature, thereby helping those involved to articulate and discuss their preferences and expectations.Publisher PDFPeer reviewe

The question-behavior effect : genuine effect or spurious phenomenon? A systematic review of randomized controlled trials with meta-analyses

OBJECTIVE: Simply answering questions about a specific behavior may change that behavior. This is known as the mere-measurement or question-behavior effect (QBE). Our objective was to synthesize the evidence for the QBE on health-related behaviors. METHOD: Included studies were randomized controlled trials that tested the effect of questionnaires or interviews about health-related behaviors and/or related cognitions compared with a no-measurement control condition or another form of measurement. Subgroup analyses were conducted to identify potential moderators. RESULTS: 41 studies were included assessing a range of health behaviors. Meta-analyses showed a small overall QBE effect (SMD = 0.09; 95% CI [0.04, 0.13]; k = 33). Studies showed moderate heterogeneity, variable risk of bias, and evidence of publication bias. No dose-response relationships were found from studies comparing more with less intensive measurement conditions. There were no significant differences in QBE by behavior, but QBEs for dental flossing, physical activity, and screening attendance were significantly different from 0. Findings were not altered by whether behavior or cognitions were measured, attitudes were or were not measured, studies used questionnaires or interviews, or outcomes were objective or self-reported. CONCLUSIONS: There is some evidence for the QBE on health-related behavior. However, risk of bias within studies and evidence of publication bias indicate that the observed small effect size may be overestimated, especially given that some studies included intervention techniques in addition to providing questionnaires. Preregistered high-quality trials with clear specification of intervention content are needed to confirm if and when measurement leads to behavior change

Quantifying the unseen benefits:an innovative economic valuation of the social and cultural values of trees, woods, and forests at risk

Trees, woods, and forests in England are associated with a wide range of social and cultural values (S&CV). However, these treescapes (i.e. trees in any location) face increasing risks from pests, diseases, climate change, and biosecurity threats. This study addresses the urgent need for comprehensive estimates of S&CV related to England’s treescapes. Current UK policies and resource allocations are based on limited “value at risk” estimates. The study proposes a novel anchor value method for holistic S&CV valuation, resulting in an annual benefits flow ranging from £7 to £10 billion. This estimate surpasses the current natural capital accounts for England’s woodlands and underscores the importance of including S&CV in total ecosystem benefits assessments. The study also applies traditional methods, namely Willingness to Pay (WTP) and Travel Cost Method (TCM), to economically value S&CV of trees at risk from pests and diseases. These methods, focusing on local use values, yield similar estimates of just under £1 billion per year. This preliminary valuation invites further debate and scrutiny

Shared values and deliberative valuation:Future directions

Valuation that focuses only on individual values evades the substantial collective and intersubjective meanings, significance and value from ecosystems. Shared, plural and cultural values of ecosystems constitute a diffuse and interdisciplinary field of research, covering an area that links questions around value ontology, elicitation and aggregation with questions of participation, ethics, and social justice. Synthesising understanding from various contributions to this Special Issue of Ecosystem Services, and with a particular focus on deliberation and deliberative valuation, we discuss key findings and present 35 future research questions in eight topic areas: 1) the ontology of shared values; 2) the role of catalyst and conflict points; 3) shared values and cultural ecosystem services; 4) transcendental values; 5) the process and outcomes of deliberation; 6) deliberative monetary valuation; 7) value aggregation, meta-values and ‘rules of the game’; and 8) integrating valuation methods. The results of this Special Issue and these key questions can help develop a more extensive evidence base to mature the area and develop environmental valuation into a more pluralistic, comprehensive, robust, legitimate and effective way of safeguarding ecosystems and their services for the future