Abstract

BackgroundCommon mental health problems impose substantial challenges to patients, carers, and health care systems. A range of interventions have demonstrable efficacy in improving the lives of people experiencing such problems. However many people are disadvantaged, either because they are unable to access primary care, or because access does not lead to adequate help. New methods are needed to understand the problems of access and generate solutions. In this paper we describe our methodological approach to managing multiple and diverse sources of evidence, within a research programme to increase equity of access to high quality mental health services in primary care.MethodsWe began with a scoping review to identify the range and extent of relevant published material, and establish key concepts related to access. We then devised a strategy to collect - in parallel - evidence from six separate sources: a systematic review of published quantitative data on access-related studies; a meta-synthesis of published qualitative data on patient perspectives; dialogues with local stakeholders; a review of grey literature from statutory and voluntary service providers; secondary analysis of patient transcripts from previous qualitative studies; and primary data from interviews with service users and carers.We synthesised the findings from these diverse sources, made judgements on key emerging issues in relation to needs and services, and proposed a range of potential interventions. These proposals were debated and refined using iterative electronic and focus group consultation procedures involving international experts, local stakeholders and service users.ConclusionsOur methods break new ground by generating and synthesising multiple sources of evidence, connecting scientific understanding with the perspectives of users, in order to develop innovative ways to meet the mental health needs of under-served groups.

Highlights

  • Common mental health problems impose substantial challenges to patients, carers, and health care systems

  • We considered the interrelationships between macro-level societal and institutional factors in the creation of mental health problems amongst hard-to-reach groups, and the interventions offered to them within or through primary care

  • Lack of knowledge about available services Information to make informed choices Signposting to relevant services Culturally acceptable Variable site delivery Multi delivery system

Read more

Summary

Methods

Underlying perspectives We began with the assumption that members of hard-toreach groups are not passive victims suffering mental health problems, but are people who interpret and respond to experiences, and are capable of mounting challenges to external forces bearing upon them [26]. Secondary analysis of qualitative datasets The aim of this study was to gather evidence from service users about key issues in relation to access to primary care mental health services, arising from the scoping review. This analysis was complementary to the meta-synthesis in that it allowed access to the full text of interview transcripts, rather than the illustrative material presented in published papers.

Background
Discussion
Strengths and limitations
Conclusions drawn on Synthesis day
Conclusions
National Institute for Clinical Excellence: Depression
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