Nicole Black, David W Johnston, Martin Knapp, Michael A Shields, Gloria H Y Wong
{"title":"澳大利亚精神保健使用中的横向不平等。","authors":"Nicole Black, David W Johnston, Martin Knapp, Michael A Shields, Gloria H Y Wong","doi":"10.1002/hec.4910","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>For people experiencing mental health problems, timely access to high-quality healthcare is imperative for improving outcomes. However, limited availability of services, high out-of-pocket costs, insufficient health literacy and stigmatizing attitudes may mean people do not receive the necessary treatment. We analyze Australian longitudinal data to document the extent and predictors of horizontal inequity in mental healthcare use among people with a newly developed mild or moderate mental disorder. Importantly, we compare people with similar health, residing in the same area, thus controlling for differences in healthcare needs and availability of services. Results suggest that mental healthcare use is not significantly associated with household income or financial hardship. In contrast, we find significant inequities by educational attainment, with university graduates around 50% more likely to receive mental healthcare than high-school dropouts. These findings are robust across subsamples and alternative modeling approaches, including panel data models with individual fixed-effects. Additional explorations of the education gradient suggest a potential pathway through mental health-specific knowledge and attitudes.</p>","PeriodicalId":12847,"journal":{"name":"Health economics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Horizontal inequity in the use of mental healthcare in Australia.\",\"authors\":\"Nicole Black, David W Johnston, Martin Knapp, Michael A Shields, Gloria H Y Wong\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/hec.4910\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>For people experiencing mental health problems, timely access to high-quality healthcare is imperative for improving outcomes. However, limited availability of services, high out-of-pocket costs, insufficient health literacy and stigmatizing attitudes may mean people do not receive the necessary treatment. We analyze Australian longitudinal data to document the extent and predictors of horizontal inequity in mental healthcare use among people with a newly developed mild or moderate mental disorder. Importantly, we compare people with similar health, residing in the same area, thus controlling for differences in healthcare needs and availability of services. Results suggest that mental healthcare use is not significantly associated with household income or financial hardship. In contrast, we find significant inequities by educational attainment, with university graduates around 50% more likely to receive mental healthcare than high-school dropouts. These findings are robust across subsamples and alternative modeling approaches, including panel data models with individual fixed-effects. Additional explorations of the education gradient suggest a potential pathway through mental health-specific knowledge and attitudes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12847,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health economics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.4910\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health economics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.4910","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Horizontal inequity in the use of mental healthcare in Australia.
For people experiencing mental health problems, timely access to high-quality healthcare is imperative for improving outcomes. However, limited availability of services, high out-of-pocket costs, insufficient health literacy and stigmatizing attitudes may mean people do not receive the necessary treatment. We analyze Australian longitudinal data to document the extent and predictors of horizontal inequity in mental healthcare use among people with a newly developed mild or moderate mental disorder. Importantly, we compare people with similar health, residing in the same area, thus controlling for differences in healthcare needs and availability of services. Results suggest that mental healthcare use is not significantly associated with household income or financial hardship. In contrast, we find significant inequities by educational attainment, with university graduates around 50% more likely to receive mental healthcare than high-school dropouts. These findings are robust across subsamples and alternative modeling approaches, including panel data models with individual fixed-effects. Additional explorations of the education gradient suggest a potential pathway through mental health-specific knowledge and attitudes.
期刊介绍:
This Journal publishes articles on all aspects of health economics: theoretical contributions, empirical studies and analyses of health policy from the economic perspective. Its scope includes the determinants of health and its definition and valuation, as well as the demand for and supply of health care; planning and market mechanisms; micro-economic evaluation of individual procedures and treatments; and evaluation of the performance of health care systems.
Contributions should typically be original and innovative. As a rule, the Journal does not include routine applications of cost-effectiveness analysis, discrete choice experiments and costing analyses.
Editorials are regular features, these should be concise and topical. Occasionally commissioned reviews are published and special issues bring together contributions on a single topic. Health Economics Letters facilitate rapid exchange of views on topical issues. Contributions related to problems in both developed and developing countries are welcome.