2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2018.10.011
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Income-based inequities in access to psychotherapy and other mental health services in Canada and Australia

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
21
1

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

2
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 39 publications
(22 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
0
21
1
Order By: Relevance
“…An increasing number of persons with mental health problems seek treatment. However, structural barriers prevent many of those affected from getting the best help possible (1,2). Depending on the health care system, a major structural barrier results from financial reasons (treatment costs or lack of insurance coverage), lack of time for undergoing treatment, or lack of clarity about where to get an appointment.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…An increasing number of persons with mental health problems seek treatment. However, structural barriers prevent many of those affected from getting the best help possible (1,2). Depending on the health care system, a major structural barrier results from financial reasons (treatment costs or lack of insurance coverage), lack of time for undergoing treatment, or lack of clarity about where to get an appointment.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, co-payments associated with receiving mental health services can be a financial barrier to accessing care. 13,14 COVID-19 response has sought to increase access through telehealth but since the medicare benefits schedule (MBS) items allow co-payment they may not improve equity. 15 The LGA-specific estimators of relative need and demand from this model could guide assessment of equity for these innovations.…”
Section: Advancing the Research Agendamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Not in current model. Private-sector varies with SD (although this is better measured with another index (13) This bears on an interface with activity-based funding considerations and possible adjustments for travel time and other challenges of service delivery to more dispersed populations. Column B: Data were calculated by dividing each catchment's population by the total state population Column C: We estimated the number of people with very high K10 per catchment by applying IRSD quintile-specific very high K10 rates (Enticott et al, 2016) to the local government areas (LGAs) in the catchment, including proportional distribution of LGAs where these span multiple catchments.…”
Section: Private Sector Activity Correctionmentioning
confidence: 99%