Mental Health Literacy at the Public Health Level in Low and Middle Income Countries: An Exploratory Mixed Methods Study in Vietnam
Principal Investigator(s): View help for Principal Investigator(s) Bahr Weiss, Vanderbilt University
Version: View help for Version V1
| Name | File Type | Size | Last Modified |
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
text/plain | 256 KB | 12/16/2020 05:44:PM |
Project Citation:
Weiss, Bahr. Mental Health Literacy at the Public Health Level in Low and Middle Income Countries: An Exploratory Mixed Methods Study in Vietnam. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2020-12-16. https://doi.org/10.3886/E129121V1
Project Description
Summary:
View help for Summary
Purpose
Mental health literacy (MHL) is key
for mental health development, particularly in low-and-middle-income countries
(LMIC) where mental health resources are limited. MHL development can be
thought of as occurring at two levels: the individual
person level (via direct contact, with specifically-targeted individuals), and
the public health level (via indirect
contact through public media, targeting the general public). Each approach has advantages
and disadvantages.
Methods The present mixed methods study assessed the status of and best approaches for development of mental health literacy in the Southeast Asian LMIC Vietnam. Because there has been relatively little discussion of MHL development at the public health level, this assessment focused on the public health level, although not exclusively. Because mental health professionals generally have the most in-depth understanding of their mental health system, study participants were 82 Vietnamese mental health professionals who completed a quantitative survey, with 48 participating in focus groups.
Results Most of the professionals viewed MHL in Vietnam as low or very low, and that it was difficult or very difficult for the general public to find effective mental health services. Main barriers underlying these problems and more generally for developing MHL in Vietnam identified in the focus groups were: (a) misinformation in the media regarding mental health and mental illness; (b) lack of licensure for non-medical mental health professionals (e.g., psychologists; social workers); (c) lack of interest in mental health from upper-level leadership.
Conclusions To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study assessing professionals’ perceptions regarding mental health literacy at both the public health and individual-person levels. Although sampling was restricted to Vietnamese professionals, results may provide initial preliminary guidance for other LMIC considering mental health literacy development at multiple levels.
Methods The present mixed methods study assessed the status of and best approaches for development of mental health literacy in the Southeast Asian LMIC Vietnam. Because there has been relatively little discussion of MHL development at the public health level, this assessment focused on the public health level, although not exclusively. Because mental health professionals generally have the most in-depth understanding of their mental health system, study participants were 82 Vietnamese mental health professionals who completed a quantitative survey, with 48 participating in focus groups.
Results Most of the professionals viewed MHL in Vietnam as low or very low, and that it was difficult or very difficult for the general public to find effective mental health services. Main barriers underlying these problems and more generally for developing MHL in Vietnam identified in the focus groups were: (a) misinformation in the media regarding mental health and mental illness; (b) lack of licensure for non-medical mental health professionals (e.g., psychologists; social workers); (c) lack of interest in mental health from upper-level leadership.
Conclusions To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study assessing professionals’ perceptions regarding mental health literacy at both the public health and individual-person levels. Although sampling was restricted to Vietnamese professionals, results may provide initial preliminary guidance for other LMIC considering mental health literacy development at multiple levels.
Scope of Project
Subject Terms:
View help for Subject Terms
Mental health literacy;
public health
Geographic Coverage:
View help for Geographic Coverage
Vietnam
Time Period(s):
View help for Time Period(s)
2019 – 2019
Collection Date(s):
View help for Collection Date(s)
2019 – 2019
Data Type(s):
View help for Data Type(s)
survey data
Methodology
Response Rate:
View help for Response Rate
100%
Sampling:
View help for Sampling
The goal of the sampling frame
was to identify mental health and education professionals with interest and understanding
of mental health literacy and the challenges of mental health literacy development
at public health level. That is, the goal of the sampling frame was not to
obtain a random sample of the general population nor a random sample of mental
health professionals, but rather to obtain a sample of mental health
professionals actively involved in the professional community and interested in
mental health literacy, thus most likely to have an understanding of mental
health literacy in Vietnam. Consequently, the study design was structured to recruit
participants at the 5th International Conference on Child Mental
Health in Hanoi, Vietnam, in October 2019. During one section of the meeting,
participants were invited to participate in a session on mental health literacy
or a session on developmental disabilities, allowing participants to self-select
for interest and background in mental health literacy. Participants selecting
the former session were introduced to the study and those interested reviewed
and signed the consent form. Participants could decide to take part in either
or both sections (quantitative, qualitative) of the study. Of the 85 Vietnamese
professionals participating in this portion of the conference, 82 (88% female,
mean age=34 years) completed the quantitative survey; 39% were practicing
psychologists, 23% mental health researchers, 17% school counselors, and 11%
medical staff (MD or nurses), with a median of nine years working in their
field. Forty-eight of these individuals choose to participate in the focus
groups, which lasted slightly more than one hour.
Data Source:
View help for Data Source
The goal of the sampling frame was to identify mental health and education professionals with interest and understanding of mental health literacy and the challenges of mental health literacy development at public health level. That is, the goal of the sampling frame was not to obtain a random sample of the general population nor a random sample of mental health professionals, but rather to obtain a sample of mental health professionals actively involved in the professional community and interested in mental health literacy, thus most likely to have an understanding of mental health literacy in Vietnam. Consequently, the study design was structured to recruit participants at the 5th International Conference on Child Mental Health in Hanoi, Vietnam, in October 2019. During one section of the meeting, participants were invited to participate in a session on mental health literacy or a session on developmental disabilities, allowing participants to self-select for interest and background in mental health literacy. Participants selecting the former session were introduced to the study and those interested reviewed and signed the consent form. Participants could decide to take part in either or both sections (quantitative, qualitative) of the study. Of the 85 Vietnamese professionals participating in this portion of the conference, 82 (88% female, mean age=34 years) completed the quantitative survey; 39% were practicing psychologists, 23% mental health researchers, 17% school counselors, and 11% medical staff (MD or nurses), with a median of nine years working in their field. Forty-eight of these individuals choose to participate in the focus groups, which lasted slightly more than one hour.
edit remove
Related Publications
Published Versions
Report a Problem
Found a serious problem with the data, such as disclosure risk or copyrighted content? Let us know.
This material is distributed exactly as received from the data depositor. As of April 2026, depositors are required to submit study materials in accessible formats. ICPSR has not reviewed, checked, or processed this material. For additional information about the study, please contact the investigator(s) directly. If you have questions about the accessibility of materials distributed by ICPSR or require further assistance, please visit ICPSR's Accessibility Center.