Background: Common mental health disorders (CMDs) are leading causes of disability globally. The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has further exacerbated the burden of CMDs. COVID-19 containment measures, including lockdowns, have disrupted access to in-person mental health care. It is therefore imperative to explore the utility of digital mental health interventions to bridge the treatment gap. Mobile health technologies are effective tools for increasing access to treatment at a lower cost. This study explores the utility of Inuka, a chat-based app hinged on the Friendship Bench problem-solving therapy intervention. The Inuka app offers double anonymity, and clients can book or cancel a session at their convenience. Inuka services can be accessed either through a mobile app or the web. Objective: We aimed to explore the feasibility of conducting a future clinical trial. Additionally, we evaluated the feasibility, acceptability, appropriateness, scalability, and preliminary effectiveness of Inuka. Methods: Data were collected using concurrent mixed methods. We used a pragmatic quasiexperimental design to compare the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary clinical effectiveness of Inuka (experimental group) and WhatsApp chat-based counseling (control). Participants received 6 problem-solving therapy sessions delivered by lay counselors. A reduction in CMDs was the primary clinical outcome. The secondary outcomes were health-related quality of life (HRQoL), disability and functioning, and social support. Quantitative outcomes were analyzed using descriptive and bivariate statistics. Finally, we used administrative data and semistructured interviews to gather data on acceptability and feasibility; this was analyzed using thematic analysis. Results: Altogether, 258 participants were screened over 6 months, with 202 assessed for eligibility, and 176 participants were included in the study (recruitment ratio of 29 participants/month). The participants’ mean age was 24.4 (SD 5.3) years, and most participants were female and had tertiary education. The mean daily smartphone usage was 8 (SD 3.5) hours. Eighty-three users signed up and completed at least one session. The average completion rate was 3 out of 4 sessions. Inuka was deemed feasible and acceptable in the local context, with connectivity challenges, app instability, expensive mobile data, and power outages cited as potential barriers to scale up. Generally, there was a decline in CMDs (F2,73=2.63; P=.08), depression (F2,73=7.67; P<.001), and anxiety (F2,73=2.95; P=.06) and a corresponding increase in HRQoL (F2,73=7.287; P<.001) in both groups. Conclusions: Study outcomes showed that it is feasible to run a future large-scale randomized clinical trial (RCT) and lend support to the feasibility and acceptability of Inuka, including evidence of preliminary effectiveness. The app’s double anonymity and structured support were the most salient features. There is a great need for iterative app updates before scaling up. Finally, a large-scale hybrid RCT with a longer follow-up to evaluate the clinical implementation and cost-effectiveness of the app is needed.

Globally, most young people living with mental health conditions lack access to mental health care but have access to a mobile device. The growing access to mobile devices in South Africa has the potential to increase access to mental health care services through digital platforms. However, uptake of digital mental health interventions may be hampered by several factors, such as privacy, confidentiality, informed consent, and affordability. This study identified the prospects and challenges of implementing a mobile phone-based mental health intervention for young people in Ingwavuma area. Data were collected from 93 young people in three villages purposefully selected in Ingwavuma area. Participants included in the study were aged 16–24. Data were collected through a questionnaire. Thematic and descriptive analysis was performed on the qualitative and quantitative data, respectively. Mental health education was low, with only 22% of participants having received prior education on mental health. About 50% of the participants had come across a mental health app, but none of them had used any of these apps; 87% of participants had Internet access; 60% preferred to use social media to contact a health worker; and 92% suggested that use of digital apps would improve mental health literacy among young people. Barriers to access of digital mental health interventions were identified as the high cost of data, restrictive religious beliefs, limited privacy, lack of native languages on most digital platforms, low digital literacy, and complicated user interface. In uMkhanyakude, uptake of digital mental health apps among the young people was low. We recommend that, developers create context-specific digital applications catered for young people from different cultural backgrounds. Socio-economic issues such as affordability also need to be addressed in developing these tools.

Background: There are substantial gaps in our knowledge regarding the aetiology of mental, neurological and substance use disorders in sub-Saharan Africa, and the cost-effectiveness and scalability of interventions to reduce the burden of these conditions on the continent. To address these gaps, international investment has focussed on building research capacity, including funding doctoral students in African countries, to support development of high quality, contextually relevant interventions. Absent, however, is an understanding of how capacity building feeds into research careers. Methods: Within a broader mental health research capacity-building initiative (African Mental Health Research Initiative), we conducted 52 qualitative interviews with early-career researchers, policymakers, academics, and service users from four African countries (Ethiopia, Malawi, South Africa, and Zimbabwe) and with international funders of mental health research. The interview guide focused on the research context, planning, and priorities and how respondents perceive research careers and funding. Thematic analysis was applied to the transcribed interviews. Results: Five components of a research career emerged: (i) research positions; (ii) research skills; (iii) funding; (iv) research commitment from African countries; and (v) advocacy. All stakeholders wanted more high-impact African researchers, but few saw a clear, replicable track for developing their careers within universities or their Ministries of Health in their African countries. This stemmed, in part, from the lack of support for infrastructure that enables high-quality research: grants administration, mentorship, university leadership, research culture, and open communication between policymakers and researchers. Conclusions: This study highlights the importance of developing research infrastructure alongside capacity-building efforts. International funders should invest in grant management at African universities which would place them at the centre of research initiatives. African universities should prioritise the creation of a research culture by developing and promoting well-defined research tracks for both clinicians and academics, investing in grant management, and raising the profile of research within their institutions.

Mental, neurological and substance use (MNS) disorders are a leading, but neglected, cause of morbidity and mortality in sub-Saharan Africa. The treatment gap for MNS is vast with only 10% of people with MNS disorders in low-income countries accessing evidence-based treatments. Reasons for this include low awareness of the burden of MNS disorders and limited evidence to support development, adaptation and implementation of effective and feasible treatments. The overall goal of the African Mental Health Research Initiative (AMARI) is to build an African-led network of MNS researchers in Ethiopia, Malawi, South Africa and Zimbabwe, who are equipped to lead high quality mental health research programs that meet the needs of their countries, and to establish a sustainable career pipeline for these researchers with an emphasis on integrating MNS research into existing programs such as HIV/AIDS. This paper describes the process leading to the development of AMARI's objectives through a theory of change workshop, successes and challenges that have been faced by the consortium in the last 4 years, and the future role that AMARI could play in further building MNS research capacity by brining on board more institutions from low- and middle-income countries with an emphasis on developing an evidence-based training curriculum and a research-driven care service.

Community engagement (CE) models have provided much needed guidance for researchers to conceptualise and design engagement strategies for research projects. Most of the published strategies, however, still show very limited contribution of the community to the engagement process. One way of achieving this is to document experiences of community members in the CE processes during project implementation. The aim of our study was to explore the experiences of two research naïve communities, regarding a CE strategy collaboratively developed by researchers and study communities in a multicountry study. The study was carried out in two research naïve communities; Gwanda, Zimbabwe and uMkhanyakude, South Africa. The multicentre study was a community based participatory ecohealth multicentre study. A qualitative case study approach was used to explore the CE strategy. Data was collected through Focus Group Discussions, Key Informant Interviews and Direct Observations. Data presented in this paper was collected at three stages of the community engagement process; soon after community entry, soon after sensitisation and during study implementation. Data was analysed through thematic analysis. The communities generally had positive experiences of the CE process. They felt that the continuous solicitation of their advice and preferences enabled them to significantly contribute to shaping the engagement process. Communities also perceived the CE process as having been flexible, and that the researchers had presented an open forum for sharing responsibilities in all decision making processes of the engagement process. This study has demonstrated that research naïve communities can significantly contribute to research processes if they are adequately engaged. The study also showed that if researchers put in maximum effort to demystify the research process, communities become empowered and participate as partners in research.