Assessing support for mental health policies among policy influencers and the general public in Alberta and Manitoba, Canada.

IF 3.1 2区 医学 Q2 PSYCHIATRY International Journal of Mental Health Systems Pub Date : 2024-02-15 DOI:10.1186/s13033-024-00624-y
Candace I J Nykiforuk, Mathew Thomson, Kimberley D Curtin, Ian Colman, T Cameron Wild, Elaine Hyshka
{"title":"Assessing support for mental health policies among policy influencers and the general public in Alberta and Manitoba, Canada.","authors":"Candace I J Nykiforuk, Mathew Thomson, Kimberley D Curtin, Ian Colman, T Cameron Wild, Elaine Hyshka","doi":"10.1186/s13033-024-00624-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is a need to improve mental health policy in Canada to address the growing population burden of mental illness. Understanding support for policy options is critical for advocacy efforts to improve mental health policy. Our purpose was to describe support for population-level healthy public policies to improve mental health among policy influencers and the general public in Alberta and Manitoba; and, identify associations between levels of support and sociodemographic variables and relative to the Nuffield Bioethics Intervention Ladder framework.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used data from the 2019 Chronic Disease Prevention Survey, which recruited a representative sample of the general public in Alberta (n = 1792) and Manitoba (n = 1909) and policy influencers in each province (Alberta n = 291, Manitoba n = 129). Level of support was described for 16 policy options using a Likert-style scale for mental health policy options by province, sample type, and sociodemographic variables using ordinal regression modelling. Policy options were coded using the Nuffield Council on Bioethics Intervention Ladder to classify support for policy options by level of intrusiveness.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Policy options were categorized as 'Provide Information' and 'Enable Choice' according to the Nuffield Intervention Ladder. There was high support for all policy options, and few differences between samples or provinces. Strong support was more common among women and among those who were more politically left (versus center). Immigrants were more likely to strongly support most of the policies. Those who were politically right leaning (versus center) were less likely to support any of the mental health policies. Mental health status, education, and Indigenous identity were also associated with support for some policy options.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There is strong support for mental health policy in Western Canada. Results demonstrate a gap between support and implementation of mental health policy and provide evidence for advocates and policy makers looking to improve the policy landscape in Canada.</p>","PeriodicalId":47752,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Mental Health Systems","volume":"18 1","pages":"8"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10868068/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Mental Health Systems","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13033-024-00624-y","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: There is a need to improve mental health policy in Canada to address the growing population burden of mental illness. Understanding support for policy options is critical for advocacy efforts to improve mental health policy. Our purpose was to describe support for population-level healthy public policies to improve mental health among policy influencers and the general public in Alberta and Manitoba; and, identify associations between levels of support and sociodemographic variables and relative to the Nuffield Bioethics Intervention Ladder framework.

Methods: We used data from the 2019 Chronic Disease Prevention Survey, which recruited a representative sample of the general public in Alberta (n = 1792) and Manitoba (n = 1909) and policy influencers in each province (Alberta n = 291, Manitoba n = 129). Level of support was described for 16 policy options using a Likert-style scale for mental health policy options by province, sample type, and sociodemographic variables using ordinal regression modelling. Policy options were coded using the Nuffield Council on Bioethics Intervention Ladder to classify support for policy options by level of intrusiveness.

Results: Policy options were categorized as 'Provide Information' and 'Enable Choice' according to the Nuffield Intervention Ladder. There was high support for all policy options, and few differences between samples or provinces. Strong support was more common among women and among those who were more politically left (versus center). Immigrants were more likely to strongly support most of the policies. Those who were politically right leaning (versus center) were less likely to support any of the mental health policies. Mental health status, education, and Indigenous identity were also associated with support for some policy options.

Conclusions: There is strong support for mental health policy in Western Canada. Results demonstrate a gap between support and implementation of mental health policy and provide evidence for advocates and policy makers looking to improve the policy landscape in Canada.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
评估加拿大艾伯塔省和马尼托巴省政策影响者和公众对心理健康政策的支持。
背景:加拿大需要改进心理健康政策,以应对日益加重的精神疾病人口负担。了解政策选择的支持度对于改善心理健康政策的宣传工作至关重要。我们的目的是描述艾伯塔省和马尼托巴省的政策影响者和普通公众对人口层面健康公共政策的支持情况,以改善心理健康;并确定支持水平与社会人口变量之间的关联,以及与纳菲尔德生物伦理学干预阶梯框架之间的关联:我们使用了 2019 年慢性病预防调查的数据,该调查招募了艾伯塔省(n = 1792)和马尼托巴省(n = 1909)具有代表性的公众样本以及各省的政策影响者(艾伯塔省 n = 291,马尼托巴省 n = 129)。采用李克特量表对各省、样本类型和社会人口变量的心理健康政策选项进行序数回归建模,对 16 个政策选项的支持程度进行描述。使用纳菲尔德生物伦理学委员会干预阶梯对政策选项进行编码,根据侵扰程度对政策选项的支持程度进行分类:结果:根据纳菲尔德干预阶梯,政策选项被分为 "提供信息 "和 "促成选择 "两类。所有政策选项都获得了很高的支持率,样本或省份之间的差异很小。女性和政治立场偏左(相对于中间派)的人更倾向于大力支持。移民更有可能强烈支持大多数政策。政治倾向右翼(相对于中间派)的人支持任何心理健康政策的可能性都较小。心理健康状况、教育程度和土著身份也与某些政策选项的支持度有关:结论:在加拿大西部,心理健康政策得到了强有力的支持。研究结果表明,精神健康政策的支持率和执行率之间存在差距,并为希望改善加拿大政策环境的倡导者和政策制定者提供了证据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
2.80%
发文量
52
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊最新文献
Reducing stigma and improving access to care for people with mental health conditions in the community: protocol for a multi-site feasibility intervention study (Indigo-Local). Reach, uptake, and psychological outcomes of two publicly funded internet-based cognitive behavioural therapy programs in Ontario, Canada: an observational study. Italian Evaluation and Excellence in REMS (ITAL-EE-REMS): appropriate placement of forensic patients in REMS forensic facilities. Evaluating Pakistan's mental healthcare system using World Health Organization's assessment instrument for mental health system (WHO-AIMS). A process study of early achievements and challenges in countries engaged with the WHO Special Initiative for Mental Health.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1