Abstract

BackgroundIt has been argued that though correlated with mental health, mental well-being is a distinct entity. Despite the wealth of literature on mental health, less is known about mental well-being. Mental health is something experienced by individuals, whereas mental well-being can be assessed at the population level. Accordingly it is important to differentiate the individual and population level factors (environmental and social) that could be associated with mental health and well-being, and as people living in deprived areas have a higher prevalence of poor mental health, these relationships should be compared across different levels of neighbourhood deprivation.MethodsA cross-sectional representative random sample of 1,209 adults from 62 Super Output Areas (SOAs) in Belfast, Northern Ireland (Feb 2010 – Jan 2011) were recruited in the PARC Study. Interview-administered questionnaires recorded data on socio-demographic characteristics, health-related behaviours, individual social capital, self-rated health, mental health (SF-8) and mental well-being (WEMWBS). Multi-variable linear regression analyses, with inclusion of clustering by SOAs, were used to explore the associations between individual and perceived community characteristics and mental health and mental well-being, and to investigate how these associations differed by the level of neighbourhood deprivation.ResultsThirty-eight and 30 % of variability in the measures of mental well-being and mental health, respectively, could be explained by individual factors and the perceived community characteristics. In the total sample and stratified by neighbourhood deprivation, age, marital status and self-rated health were associated with both mental health and well-being, with the ‘social connections’ and local area satisfaction elements of social capital also emerging as explanatory variables. An increase of +1 in EQ-5D-3 L was associated with +1SD of the population mean in both mental health and well-being. Similarly, a change from ‘very dissatisfied’ to ‘very satisfied’ for local area satisfaction would result in +8.75 for mental well-being, but only in the more affluent of areas.ConclusionsSelf-rated health was associated with both mental health and mental well-being. Of the individual social capital explanatory variables, ‘social connections’ was more important for mental well-being. Although similarities in the explanatory variables of mental health and mental well-being exist, socio-ecological interventions designed to improve them may not have equivalent impacts in rich and poor neighbourhoods.

Highlights

  • It has been argued that though correlated with mental health, mental well-being is a distinct entity

  • This review further showed that there are no studies investigating the relationship between individual social capital and measures designed to assess mental well-being such as the WarwickEdinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale (WEMWBS) [10]

  • The sample is from a total of 62 Super Output Areas (SOAs), with 10, 13, 5, 10 and 24 SOAs being within the Northern Ireland Multiple Deprivation Measure (NIMDM) quintiles from most to least deprived respectively

Read more

Summary

Introduction

It has been argued that though correlated with mental health, mental well-being is a distinct entity. Mental health is something experienced by individuals, whereas mental well-being can be assessed at the population level. It is important to differentiate the individual and population level factors (environmental and social) that could be associated with mental health and well-being, and as people living in deprived areas have a higher prevalence of poor mental health, these relationships should be compared across different levels of neighbourhood deprivation. Mental health and mental well-being can be seen to form two distinct, but correlated, continua in populations [7,8,9]. It is plausible that different individual and community level factors could affect mental health and mental well-being in different ways. It is important to differentiate the individual and perceived social and environmental variables associated with both

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call