METHODS: The authors obtained quantitative data as key indicators of the neurosurgical workforce from each country. Qualitative data analysis was also done to provide a description of the current state of neurosurgical training and education in the region. A strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) analysis was also done to identify strategies for improvement.

RESULTS: The number of neurosurgeons in each country is as follows: 370 in Indonesia, 10,014 in Japan, 152 in Malaysia, 134 in the Philippines, and 639 in Taiwan. With a large neurosurgical workforce, the high-income countries Japan and Taiwan have relatively high neurosurgeon to population ratios of 1 per 13,000 and 1 per 37,000, respectively. In contrast, the low- to middle-income countries Indonesia, Malaysia, and the Philippines have low neurosurgeon to population ratios of 1 per 731,000, 1 per 210,000, and 1 per 807,000, respectively. In terms of the number of training centers, Japan has 857, Taiwan 30, Indonesia 7, Malaysia 5, and the Philippines 10. In terms of the number of neurosurgical residents, Japan has 1000, Taiwan 170, Indonesia 199, Malaysia 53, and the Philippines 51. The average number of yearly additions to the neurosurgical workforce is as follows: Japan 180, Taiwan 27, Indonesia 10, Malaysia 4, and the Philippines 3. The different countries included in this report have many similarities and differences in their models and systems of neurosurgical education. Certain important strategies have been formulated in order for the system to be responsive to the needs of the catchment population: 1) establishment of a robust network of international collaboration for reciprocal certification, skills sharing, and subspecialty training; 2) incorporation of in-service residency and fellowship training within the framework of improving access to neurosurgical care; and 3) strengthening health systems, increasing funding, and developing related policies for infrastructure development.

METHODS: Data collection included two strategies. First, previous systematic reviews were searched for studies that met the inclusion criteria of the current review. Second, a new search was done, covering the time since the previous reviews, i.e. January 2013 to May 2017. Five search concepts were combined in order to capture relevant literature: stigma, mental health, intervention, professional students in medicine and nursing, and LMICs. A qualitative analysis of all included full texts was done with the software MAXQDA. Full texts were analysed with regard to the content of interventions, didactic methods, mental disorders, cultural adaptation, type of outcome measure and primary outcomes. Furthermore, a methodological quality assessment was undertaken.

RESULTS: A total of nine studies from six countries (Brazil, China, Malaysia, Nigeria, Somaliland and Turkey) were included. All studies reported significant results in at least one outcome measure. However, from the available literature, it is difficult to draw conclusions on the most effective interventions. No meta-analysis could be calculated due to the large heterogeneity of intervention content, evaluation design and outcome measures. Studies with contact interventions (either face-to-face or video) demonstrated attitudinal change. There was a clear lack of studies focusing on discriminatory behaviours. Accordingly, training of specific communication and clinical skills was lacking in most studies, with the exception of one study that showed a positive effect of training interview skills on attitudes. Methods for cultural adaptation of interventions were rarely documented. The methodological quality of most studies was relatively low, with the exception of two studies.