BackgroundEarly interventions are recognised as key to improving life chances for children and reducing inequalities in health and well-being, however there is a paucity of high quality research into the effectiveness of interventions to address childhood health and development outcomes. Planning and implementing standalone RCTs for multiple, individual interventions would be slow, cumbersome and expensive. This paper describes the protocol for an innovative experimental birth cohort: Born in Bradford’s Better Start (BiBBS) that will simultaneously evaluate the impact of multiple early life interventions using efficient study designs. Better Start Bradford (BSB) has been allocated £49 million from the Big Lottery Fund to implement 22 interventions to improve outcomes for children aged 0–3 in three key areas: social and emotional development; communication and language development; and nutrition and obesity. The interventions will be implemented in three deprived and ethnically diverse inner city areas of Bradford.MethodThe BiBBS study aims to recruit 5000 babies, their mothers and their mothers’ partners over 5 years from January 2016-December 2020. Demographic and socioeconomic information, physical and mental health, lifestyle factors and biological samples will be collected during pregnancy. Parents and children will be linked to their routine health and local authority (including education) data throughout the children’s lives. Their participation in BSB interventions will also be tracked. BiBBS will test interventions using the Trials within Cohorts (TwiCs) approach and other quasi-experimental designs where TwiCs are neither feasible nor ethical, to evaluate these early life interventions. The effects of single interventions, and the cumulative effects of stacked (multiple) interventions on health and social outcomes during the critical early years will be measured.DiscussionThe focus of the BiBBS cohort is on intervention impact rather than observation. As far as we are aware BiBBS is the world’s first such experimental birth cohort study. While some risk factors for adverse health and social outcomes are increasingly well described, the solutions to tackling them remain elusive. The novel design of BiBBS can contribute much needed evidence to inform policy makers and practitioners about effective approaches to improve health and well-being for future generations.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12889-016-3318-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Despite the high prevalence of mental illness, mental health remains a low priority in Africa. There has been no investigation of the views of stakeholders in Africa on why this is and what can be done. This paper reports a comparison of the views of stakeholders in Ghana, South Africa, Uganda and Zambia, focusing on the priority given to mental health by the government at the national and regional/province levels. We conducted semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders and used a two-stage approach to analysis: firstly framework analysis in each study country, followed by comparative analysis of the country data. Mental health was largely considered a low priority at national and regional/provincial levels in all four countries. We identified nine factors affecting the priority of mental health, which were grouped into three categories: legitimacy of the problem, feasibility of response and support for response. Respondents put forward a range of experiences and suggestions for increasing the priority given to mental health. We conclude with broad suggestions to raise the priority of mental health. These suggestions are particularly relevant as mental health increases in priority on the international agenda, in order to inform advocacy for increased priority for mental health in Africa.