Research and policymaking on positive mental health and well-being have increased within the last decade, partly fueled by decreasing levels of well-being in the general population and among at-risk groups. However, measurement of well-being often takes place in the absence of reflection on the underlying theoretical conceptualisation of well-being. This disguises the fact that different rating scales of well-being often measure very different phenomena because rating scales are based on different philosophical assumptions, which represent radically different foundational views about the nature of well-being. The aim of this paper is to examine the philosophical foundation of the Well-Being Index WHO-5 in order to clarify the underlying normative commitments and the psychometric compromises involved in the translation of philosophical theory into practice. WHO-5 has been introduced as a rating scale that measures the affective and hedonistic dimensions of well-being. It is widely used within public health and mental health research. This paper introduces the philosophical theory of Hedonism and explores how two central assumptions that relate to hedonistic theory are reflected in the construction of WHO-5. The first concerns ‘the hedonic balance’, that is the relation between positive and negative emotions. The second assumption concerns ‘the value of emotions’, that is, how to determine the duration and intensity of emotions. At the end, Hedonism is contrasted with Life Satisfaction Theory, an alternative foundational theory of well-being, in order to clarify that the outlook of WHO-5 is more a rating system of positive affect than a cognitive judgement of overall life satisfaction. We conclude that it is important to examine the philosophical foundation of rating scales of well-being, such as WHO-5, in order to be fully able to assess the magnitude as well as the limits of their results.

No abstract

Background Patients with mental disorders have an increased risk of developing somatic disorders, just as they have a higher risk of dying from them. These patients often report feeling devaluated and rejected by health professionals in the somatic health care system, and increasing evidence shows that disparities in health care provision contribute to poor health outcomes. The aim of this review was to map and synthesize literature on somatic health professionals’ stigmatization toward patients with mental disorders. Methods We conducted a scoping review using Arksey and O’Malley’s framework and carried out a systematic search in three databases: Cinahl, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO in May–June 2019. Peer-reviewed articles published in English or Scandinavian languages during 2008–2019 were reviewed according to title, abstract and full-text reading. We organized and analyzed data using NVivo. Results A total of 137 articles meeting the eligibility criteria were reviewed and categorized as observational studies (n = 73) and intervention studies (n = 64). A majority of studies (N = 85) focused on patients with an unspecified number of mental disorders, while 52 studies focused on specific diagnoses, primarily schizophrenia (n = 13), self-harm (n = 13), and eating disorders (n = 9). Half of the studies focused on health students (n = 64), primarily nursing students (n = 26) and medical students (n = 25), while (n = 66) focused on health care professionals, primarily emergency staff (n = 16) and general practitioners (n = 13). Additionally, seven studies focused on both health professionals and students. A detailed characterization of the identified intervention studies was conducted, resulting in eight main types of interventions. Conclusions The large number of studies identified in this review suggests that stigmatizing attitudes and behaviors toward patients with mental disorders is a worldwide challenge within a somatic health care setting. For more targeted interventions, there is a need for further research on underexposed mental diagnoses and knowledge on whether specific health professionals have a more stigmatizing attitude or behavior toward specific mental disorders.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to investigate the overall campaign reach and impact of the ABCs of Mental Health in Denmark; a secondary objective is to investigate how mental health-promoting beliefs and actions are associated with good mental health. Design/methodology/approach A questionnaire was administered to two representative cross-sectional samples of the Danish population (1,508 respondents in 2019; 1,507 respondents in 2021) via an online survey. The data were subsequently pooled together into one sample consisting of 3,015 respondents. In addition to questions pertaining to campaign reach and impact, the questionnaire also included a validated scale for mental well-being and questions about beliefs and actions in regard to enhancing mental health. Findings About 7.6% had been reached by the campaign (familiar with ABC name or messages), or 11.9% when also counting familiarity with campaign slogans. Among these, respondents reported (proportions in parentheses) that the campaign had 1) made them reflect on their mental health (74.2%), talk to friends and family about mental health (35.5%), given them new knowledge about what they can do to enhance mental health (78.4%), or take action to enhance their own mental health (16.2%). An internal well-being locus of control and proactive behaviours towards enhancing mental health are shown to be associated with higher mean scores on mental well-being, lower odds of low mental well-being and higher odds of higher mental well-being. Originality/value An internal well-being locus of control and proactive behaviours towards enhancing mental health are suggested to both prevent low levels of mental well-being and promoting high levels of mental well-being. The results indicate that the ABCs of Mental Health campaign may be implemented to promote such beliefs and actions universally throughout the population.

Continuity of mental health care is central to improve the treatment and rehabilitation of people with mental disorders. While most studies on continuity of care fail to take the perspectives of service users into account, the aim of this study was to explore the perceived meanings of continuity of care among people with long-term mental disorders. Fifteen service users participated in semi-structured in-depth interviews. We used template analysis to guide the analysis. The main transversal themes of continuity were “Navigating the system” and “Connecting to people and everyday life.” While the first theme related to the participants’ experiences of their interaction with the mental health care system, the latter related to their hopes and perceived opportunities for a good life as desired outcomes of mental health care. We conclude that efforts to improve continuity of mental health care should be tailored to the priorities of service users.