Among men, depression is often unrecognised and untreated. Men employed in male-dominated industries and occupations may be particularly vulnerable. However, efforts to develop tailored workplace interventions are hampered by lack of prevalence data. A systematic review of studies reporting prevalence rates for depression in male dominated workforce groups was undertaken. Studies were included if they were published between 1990 - June 2012 in English, examined adult workers in male-dominated industries or occupations (> 70% male workforce), and used clinically relevant indicators of depression. Twenty studies met these criteria. Prevalence of depression ranged from 0.0% to 28.0%. Five studies reported significantly lower prevalence rates for mental disorders among male-dominated workforce groups than comparison populations, while six reported significantly higher rates. Eight studies additionally found significantly higher levels of depression in male-dominated groups than comparable national data. Overall, the majority of studies found higher levels of depression among workers in male-dominated workforce groups. There is a need to address the mental health of workers in male-dominated groups. The workplace provides an important but often overlooked setting to develop tailored strategies for vulnerable groups.

Background and Aims: Working conditions are an important health determinant. Employment factors can negatively affect mental health (MH), but there is little research on MH risk factors in male-dominated industries (MDI). Method: A systematic review of risk factors for anxiety and depression disorders in MDI was undertaken. MDI comprised ≥ 70% male workers and included agriculture, construction, mining, manufacturing, transport and utilities. Major electronic databases (CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Informit, PsycINFO, PubMed and Scopus) were searched. Each study was categorised according to National Health and Medical Research Council's hierarchy of evidence and study quality was assessed according to six methodological criteria. Results: Nineteen studies met the inclusion criteria. Four categories of risk were identified: individual factors, team environment, work conditions and work–home interference. The main risk factors associated with anxiety and depression in MDI were poor health and lifestyles, unsupportive workplace relationships, job overload and job demands. Some studies indicated a higher risk of anxiety and depression for blue-collar workers. Conclusion: Substantial gaps exist in the evidence. Studies with stronger methodologies are required. Available evidence suggests that comprehensive primary, secondary and tertiary prevention approaches to address MH risk factors in MDI are necessary. There is a need for organisationally focused workplace MH policies and interventions.

Social determinants, or the conditions in which individuals are born, grow, live, work and age, can result in inequities in health and well-being. However, to-date little research has examined alcohol use and alcohol-related problems from an inequities and social determinants perspective. This study reviewed the evidence base regarding inequities in alcohol consumption and alcohol-related health outcomes in Australia and identified promising approaches for promoting health equity. Fair Foundations: the VicHealth framework for health equity was used as an organizing schema. The review found that social determinants can strongly influence inequities in alcohol consumption and related harms. In general, lower socioeconomic groups experience more harm than wealthier groups with the same level of alcohol consumption. While Australia has implemented numerous alcohol-related interventions and policies, most do not explicitly aim to reduce inequities, and some may inadvertently exacerbate existing inequities. Interventions with the greatest potential to decrease inequities in alcohol consumption and alcohol-related harms include town planning, zoning and licensing to prevent disproportionate clustering of outlets in disadvantaged areas; interventions targeting licensed venues; and interventions targeting vulnerable populations. Interventions that may worsen inequities include national guidelines, technological interventions and public drinking bans. There is a need for further research into the best methods for reducing inequities in alcohol consumption and related harms.

No abstract