Improving Mental Health Help-Seeking Amongst Male University Students: A Series of Gender-Sensitive Mental Health Pilot Interventions.

Abstract

Background: Up to a third of students experience a common mental health condition which is associated with decreased academic functioning and an increased risk of dropping out. While the prevalence of common mental health difficulties is lower amongst male students, worryingly, they are twice as likely to die by suicide. The importance of developing interventions that are gender-sensitive for male students to improve their uptake of mental health initiatives has been recently emphasised. However, acceptable, feasible and effective methods for male students are unexplored. The current study conducted three gender-sensitive pilot interventions for male students to evaluate acceptability (including uptake), changes to help-seeking and mental health status.Methods:Three gender-sensitive interventions were delivered to 24 male students. The interventions consisted of: Intervention 1 – a formal mental health intervention targeting male students (“psycho-educational model”), Intervention 2 - a second formal intervention that adopted more gender-sensitive language and promoted positive masculine traits (“positive masculinity model”), and Intervention 3 - an informal drop-in offering a social space for male students to receive general health information and connect with other students (“informal drop-in Man Cave model”). These were evaluated for acceptability (including uptake), attitudes to help-seeking and mental health outcomes.Results:In terms of acceptability, Intervention 3 - the informal drop-in (Man Cave) appeared better at engaging male students who have greater conformity to maladaptive masculine traits, more negative attitudes to help-seeking, higher levels of self-stigma, who were less likely to have used mental health support before and belonged to an ethnic minority. No significant changes to help-seeking attitudes, behaviours, or mental health status were observed across the interventions at feasibility stage. All interventions were deemed equally acceptable with minimal opportunity costs and perceived burden. Conclusions:These findings indicate differences in acceptability, particularly uptake, for male students who may be seen as more difficult to engage. Using informal strategies may help reach male students who would otherwise not engage with mental health support, familiarise them with the idea of help-seeking, and connect them with pre-existing mental health interventions. While no differences in outcomes measured were found in these small studies, more work needs to be carried out using larger samples to investigate the efficacy of informal interventions to engage male students.