Review: Learning Inside the System: What Community-Based MHPSS Practice in Pakistan Teaches Us About Global Mental Health {under peer review}

 

Reviewer: Jaisalmer de Frutos Lucas

Completed: 07-05-2026 13:46

 

Recommendation: Revisions Required

 

 

	Yes	No	N/A
Is the research question clearly defined?		+
Are the methods appropriate and sufficiently detailed?			+
Is the data analysis robust and replicable?			+
Are the conclusions supported by the results?		+
Is the manuscript well organised and clearly written?	+
Are tables, figures, and supplementary material informative and necessary?			+
Is the abstract an accurate summary of the study?	+
Does the manuscript contribute meaningfully to the field?	+
Is it relevant to the field of mental health or related disciplines that are connected to the scope of the Journal?	+
Are ethical approvals and participant consents adequately described?			+
Have competing interests, funding, and data availability been transparently declared?	+

 

Comments for the authors:

 

- Introduction

The topic is very timely and relevant, but the way it is presented seems to be borderline sensational. While this is a critical reflection, not an empirical article, I understand that some statements could be presented in a more rigourous manner. This applies for example to the wording and also the references mentioned in paragraph 1, where 2/3 are from 10 years ago, while the authors try to contextualise the current moment. The following paragraphs show an improvement in this sense.

This section would benefit from even a super short but operational definition of mental health education.

WHO, UNFPA, IMC, and UNICEF might need full terms, not just acronyms, check the guidelines. Please, review the use of acronyms throughout all sections in general.

- What the GMH Pedagogical Literature Promises and Where It Falls Short?

This statement requires a reference "Yet supervision skills are rarely taught explicitly in GMH pre-service programmes and left out of most clinical programs".

- What Academic Institutes Can DO Differently?

The question posed here makes sense, but I believe it comes to late in the article. It would help frame the text if it was addressed much earlier.

 

- Redesign Placement as the Curricular Spine, Not a Peripheral Requirement

This section would benefit from more rigour and more references to support the statements, so that they are presented as critical arguments and not just opinions.

- Conclusion

The conclusion, again, sounds more like an strongly held opinion than a critical statement supported by the arguments made throughout the case studies. I believe this is a formulation issue that can be improved. It would also help to start the manuscript with a clear objective, aligned with a framing question, that is then resolved in the conclusion section, based on all the arguments rigoursly presented inbetween.

- Final remarks

This is a conceptual insights and critical reflections manuscript, not an opinion or a comment. Therefore I believe that this work needs to be revised to be presented in a more rigourous manner, supported by more recent references in some of the cases.