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

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.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
PLOS mental health.
Published
2025-11-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmen.0000464
Primary Topic
Employment and Welfare Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

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

Behdin Nowrouzi‐Kia, Airani Sathananthan, Kishana Balakrishnar, Raihana Premji
PLOS mental health.
Employment and Welfare Studies
article

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

Behdin Nowrouzi‐Kia, Airani Sathananthan, Kishana Balakrishnar, Raihana Premji
article en

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.

PLOS mental health.Vol. 2(11)
University Health Network (CA), Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CA), University of Toronto (CA), Krembil Research Institute, Laurentian University (CA)
Openalex Percentile: Top 50%
Employment and Welfare Studies
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.