Abstract
The term 'missing-middle' has been prominent in discourse relating to provision of mental health care in Australia, particularly by proponents of non-governmental youth mental health services such as headspace and related adult services. We investigate whether there is an empirical basis for use of the 'missing-middle' term, founded on qualitative and quantitative research. Despite the widespread use of the term 'missing-middle' for advocacy in Australia, there is a lack of research characterising the epidemiological characteristics of the group. The validity of advocacy predicated on the basis of the 'missing-middle' care-gap should be reconsidered. Research, such as systematic service mapping and health needs assessment, is a necessary foundation for evidence-based mental healthcare policy, planning and implementation. Without such research, vital government funds may be deployed to 'missing-middle' programmes that may not improve Australian public health outcomes.
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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
