Introduction Climate change and climate-related disasters adversely affect mental health. Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) are particularly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change and climate-related disasters and often lack adequate mental healthcare infrastructure. We used the scoping review methodology to determine how exposure to climate change and climate-related disasters influences the presence of mental disorders among those living in LMICs. We also aimed to recognise existing gaps in this area of literature. Methods This review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews checklist. To identify relevant studies, we searched five electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Global Health, APA PsycInfo and Sociological Abstracts) from 1 January 2007 to 31 December 2019. We also searched the grey literature. Included studies had an adult-focused LMIC population, a climate change or climate-related disaster exposure and a mental disorder outcome. Relevant study information was extracted and synthesised. Results Fifty-eight studies were identified, most of which (n=48) employed a cross-sectional design. The most commonly studied exposure–outcome combinations were flood-related post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (n=28), flood-related depression (n=15) and storm-related PTSD (n=13). The majority of studies identified a positive exposure–outcome association. However, few studies included a baseline or comparator (ie, unexposed) group, thereby limiting our understanding of the magnitude or nature of this association. There was also great heterogeneity in this literature, making studies difficult to pool or compare. Several research gaps were identified including the lack of longitudinal studies and non-uniformity of geographic coverage. Conclusion To our knowledge, this was the first scoping review to investigate the relationship between climate change and climate-related disaster exposures and mental disorder outcomes in LMICs. Our findings support the need for further research, but also highlight that mental health should be a priority within LMIC climate change policy considerations.

Background: The family is a key setting for health promotion. Contemporary health promoting family models can establish scaffolds for shaping health behaviors and can be useful tools for education and health promotion.Objectives: The objective of this scoping review is to provide details as to how conceptual and theoretical models of the health promoting potential of the family are being used in health promotion contexts.Design: Guided by PRISMA ScR guidelines, we used a three-step search strategy to find relevant papers. This included key-word searching electronic databases (Medline, PSycINFO, Embase, and CINAHL), searching the reference lists of included studies, and intentionally searching for grey literature (in textbooks, dissertations, thesis manuscripts and reports.)Results: After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, the overall search generated 113 included manuscripts/chapters with 118 unique models. Through our analysis of these models, three main themes were apparent: 1) ecological factors are central components to most models or conceptual frameworks; 2) models were attentive to cultural and other diversities, allowing room for a wide range of differences across family types, and for different and ever-expanding social norms and roles; and 3) the role of the child as a passive recipient of their health journey rather than as an active agent in promoting their own family health was highlighted as an important gap in many of the identified models.Conclusions: This review contributes a synthesis of contemporary literature in this area and supports the priority of ecological frameworks and diversity of family contexts. It encourages researchers, practitioners and family stakeholders to recognize the value of the child as an active agent in shaping the health promoting potential of their family context.

Knowledge and effective interventions exist to address many current global health inequities. However, there is limited awareness, uptake, and use of knowledge to inform action to improve the health of disadvantaged populations. The gap between knowledge and action to improve health equity is of concern to health researchers and practitioners. This study identifies and critically examines the usefulness of existing knowledge to action models or frameworks for promoting health equity. We conducted a scoping review of existing literature to identify knowledge to action (KTA) models or frameworks and critiqued the models using a health equity support rubric. We identified forty-eight knowledge to action models or frameworks. Six models scored between eight and ten of a maximum 12 points on the health equity support rubric. These high scoring models or frameworks all mentioned equity-related concepts. Attention to multisectoral approaches was the factor most often lacking in the low scoring models. The concepts of knowledge brokering, integrative processes, such as those in some indigenous health research, and Ecohealth applied to KTA all emerged as promising areas. Existing knowledge to action models or frameworks can help guide knowledge translation to support action on the social determinants of health and health equity. There is a need to further test existing models or frameworks. This process should be informed by participatory and integrative research. There is room to develop more robust equity supporting models.

Children, particularly those living in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), are highly vulnerable to climate change and its impacts. Our main objective was to conduct a scoping literature review to determine how exposure to climate change and climate-related disasters influences the presence of mental disorders among children in LMICs. We also aimed to identify gaps in this area of scholarship. We included studies of children in LMICs that had a climate change or climate-related disaster exposure and mental disorder outcome. Twenty-three studies were included in the final synthesis. Fourteen studies were conducted in China, three in India, two each in Pakistan and the Philippines, and one each in Namibia and Dominica. All studies assessed the association between a climate-related disaster exposure and a mental disorder outcome, while none explored broader climate change-related exposures. Post-traumatic stress disorder (n = 21 studies) and depression (n = 8 studies) were the most common mental disorder outcomes. There was considerable between-study heterogeneity in terms of sample size, follow-up length, and outcome measurement. Overall, the literature in this area was sparse. Additional high-quality research is required to better understand the impacts of climate-related disasters and climate change on mental disorders within this population to ultimately inform future policies and interventions.