ArticlePloS one2023
Patterns of mental health care provision in urban areas: A comparative analysis for local policy in the ACT.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Urbanisation presents specific mental health challenges, requiring a better understanding of service availability in urban areas for mental health care planning. Our objective is to analyse patterns of urban mental healthcare provision in Australia, and compare these with relevant national and international regions to inform urban mental healthcare policy and planning. Following a health ecosystems approach, we use a standardised service classification instrument, the Description and Evaluation of Services and DirectoriEs (DESDE), and Mental Health Care Atlases, to compare the availability, bed capacity and diversity of services providing specialised mental health or psychosocial care that are universally accessible (ie provided at no or low cost only in all relevant care sectors in four Australian and three international urban regions. We used a heuristics approach and an homogeneity test. Applicability to local policy was assessed using the Adoption Impact Ladder. Community care was less developed in Australia than internationally, except in the case of residential care in Australian Capital Territory, our reference area. Alternatives to hospitalisation were scarce across all regions. The Atlas was applicable to regional and local mental health planning. Differences in pattern of care between regions has implications for planning, equality of access to care and prioritisation of resources. An ecosystems approach is relevant to service planning in mental healthcare at local level.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.