ArticleBMJ open2024
Population density and receipt of care for common mental disorders: a cross-sectional analysis of English household data from the 2014 Adult Psychiatric Morbidity Survey.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesPeople living in less urban areas in the UK may have reduced access to mental healthcare compared with people in urban areas. Although this was not reported in the 2000 Adult Psychiatric Morbidity Survey (APMS) data, subsequent changes to mental health provision and economic recession may have impacted care inequalities. We re-examined this, hypothesising that those living in less urban areas of England received less antidepressant medication and psychological interventions, compared with those living in urban areas, after adjusting for covariates including common mental disorders (CMDs) and socioeconomic status.
designNational cross-sectional study.
settingHouseholds in England.
participantsWe analysed data from 7455 participants aged 16 and above from the 2014 English APMS. EXPOSURES: Residence in an urban or less urban area. PRIMARY OUTCOME: Current receipt of any antidepressant medication or any psychological intervention.
resultsParticipants living in less urban areas were half as likely to be in receipt of any psychological intervention relative to those living in urban areas (adjusted OR (aOR) 0.49; 95% CI 0.30 to 0.79; p=0.004). There was no association between urbanisation and antidepressant receipt (aOR 1.01; 95% CI 0.81 to 1.25; p=0.944).
conclusionPeople living in less urban areas have a lower likelihood of being in receipt of psychological treatment for CMDs, which may indicate barriers to care access. Our findings differ from the results of a study using a comparable sample conducted 14 years previously. While Improving Access to Psychological Therapies services have increased therapy access nationwide, this may have had more impact in urban areas, potentially widening urban/rural inequalities. Further research is needed to understand how to address such geographical inequalities in access to mental healthcare.
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.