What are the priorities of consumers and carers regarding measurement for evaluation in mental healthcare? Results from a Q-methodology study

Abstract Background The purpose of this study was to identify and describe common views of people with lived experience of mental health challenges – consumers and carers, families and supporters – of what they consider the most important measures to include in health economic evaluations which assess the incremental value of competing options in mental health care. Methods Participants ( n = 111) were people living in the state of Victoria, Australia, who identified as consumers of mental healthcare ( n = 38); carers, family members and/or supporters ( n = 43); or both ( n = 30). Factor analysis based on Q-Methodology was used to identify clusters of people who hold similar viewpoints. Common viewpoints were described in terms of the characteristics of the group, and a qualitative interpretation was conducted on the basis of distinguishing statements and quotes provided in participants’ own words. Results We identified four common views: (1) safety before all else, prioritizing physical, sexual and psychological safety; (2) hope and partnership in processes of care; (3) physical and emotional health and wellbeing; and (4) care access, continuity and partnership with families. Although different priorities were identified for each viewpoint, key priority areas that were common to all views were having an environment in the health service that fosters respect and dignity, and that consumers feel heard and listened to. In sub-group and qualitative analyses, differences were observed regarding the likelihood of consumers and carers holding each of the views, as well as by age group. Conclusions While some differences were noted between the views of consumers and carers and different age groups, there was also common ground regarding what outcomes are of most importance to measure. Including these measures in evaluation frameworks would provide a way of focussing mental healthcare decisions on the aspects of mental healthcare that are of most value to consumers and carers, thereby addressing an important shortcoming of current approaches to decision-making in mental healthcare.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Health Research Policy and Systems
Published
2024-11-11
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-024-01239-y
Primary Topic
Q Methodology Applications
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

What are the priorities of consumers and carers regarding measurement for evaluation in mental healthcare? Results from a Q-methodology study

Gemma Olsen, Keir Saltmarsh, Rachel O’Loughlin, Caroline Lambert et al.
Health Research Policy and Systems
Q Methodology Applications
article

What are the priorities of consumers and carers regarding measurement for evaluation in mental healthcare? Results from a Q-methodology study

Gemma Olsen, Keir Saltmarsh, Rachel O’Loughlin, Caroline Lambert, Harriet Hiscock, Kim Dalziel, Nancy J. Devlin, Julie Anderson, Kate Thwaites
article en

Abstract

Abstract Background The purpose of this study was to identify and describe common views of people with lived experience of mental health challenges – consumers and carers, families and supporters – of what they consider the most important measures to include in health economic evaluations which assess the incremental value of competing options in mental health care. Methods Participants ( n = 111) were people living in the state of Victoria, Australia, who identified as consumers of mental healthcare ( n = 38); carers, family members and/or supporters ( n = 43); or both ( n = 30). Factor analysis based on Q-Methodology was used to identify clusters of people who hold similar viewpoints. Common viewpoints were described in terms of the characteristics of the group, and a qualitative interpretation was conducted on the basis of distinguishing statements and quotes provided in participants’ own words. Results We identified four common views: (1) safety before all else, prioritizing physical, sexual and psychological safety; (2) hope and partnership in processes of care; (3) physical and emotional health and wellbeing; and (4) care access, continuity and partnership with families. Although different priorities were identified for each viewpoint, key priority areas that were common to all views were having an environment in the health service that fosters respect and dignity, and that consumers feel heard and listened to. In sub-group and qualitative analyses, differences were observed regarding the likelihood of consumers and carers holding each of the views, as well as by age group. Conclusions While some differences were noted between the views of consumers and carers and different age groups, there was also common ground regarding what outcomes are of most importance to measure. Including these measures in evaluation frameworks would provide a way of focussing mental healthcare decisions on the aspects of mental healthcare that are of most value to consumers and carers, thereby addressing an important shortcoming of current approaches to decision-making in mental healthcare.

Health Research Policy and SystemsVol. 22(1)
Royal Children's Hospital (AU), The University of Melbourne (AU), Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society (AU), Murdoch Children's Research Institute (AU), Melbourne Health (AU), Victoria University (AU), RMIT University (AU)
Melbourne Research, University of Melbourne
Openalex Percentile: Top 75%
Q Methodology Applications
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.