ArticlePLOS mental health2025
The relationship between consultation modality and mental health professional type and perceived quality of care and mental health outcomes: A comparison between employed and unemployed individuals.
Article in PLOS mental health, 2025. 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mental health is becoming increasingly acknowledged as a critical factor to one's well-being. Poor mental health can have serious impacts, particularly among working and non-working adults, requiring the need for effective treatments and interventions tailored to them. The type of mental health professional consulted and the type of consultation modality may be associated with individuals' perceptions of the quality of care that they receive as well as their mental health outcomes. Therefore, this study aims to examine the relationship between the type of consultation with different mental health professionals and the perceived quality of care and mental health outcomes among employed and unemployed Canadians. Data was utilized from the 2024 Mental Health and Access to Care Survey by Statistics Canada. Independent variables included the type of mental health professional consulted (psychiatrist, family doctor, psychologist, and social worker) and consultation modality (in-person, remote, and hybrid). Primary outcome variables were self-reported quality of care and perceived mental health outcomes. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to calculate odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals, controlling for age, gender, marital status, and visible minority status. A total of 1,222 participants were analyzed. Unemployed participants who accessed hybrid psychiatry services were significantly less likely, about one-sixth, to report lower quality of care than those using in-person services (AOR: 0.16; 95% CI: 0.02-0.98). Similarly, those who used hybrid family doctor services were less likely, about one-fifth, to report lower quality of care (AOR: 0.21; 95% CI: 0.07-0.66). No statistically significant differences in mental health outcomes were found across consultation modality and professional type for both employed and unemployed groups. By analyzing both the modality of care and the professional consulted, notable differences emerged in self-reported quality of care. Future research should further explore how inter-professional collaboration can improve the quality of care and mental health outcomes.
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.