Search

There is limited empirical evidence documenting the magnitude and correlates of area-level variability in unmet need for children's mental health services. Research is needed that identifies area-level characteristics that can inform strategies for reducing unmet need in the population. The study purpose is to: (1) estimate area-level variation in children's unmet need for mental health services (using Service Areas as defined by the Ontario Ministry of Children and Youth Services), and (2) identify area-level service arrangements, and geographic and population characteristics associated with unmet need. Using individual-level general population data, area-level government administrative data and Census data from Ontario, Canada, we use multilevel regression models to analyze unmet need for mental health services among children (level 1) nested within Service Areas (level 2). The study finds that 1.64% of the reliable variance in unmet need for mental health services is attributable to between-area differences. Across areas, we find that Service Areas with more agencies had a lower likelihood of unmet need for mental health services. Compared to other Service Areas, Toronto had much lower likelihood of unmet need compared to the rest of Ontario. Rural areas, areas with unsatisfactory public transport, and areas with higher levels of socio-economic disadvantage had a higher likelihood of unmet need for mental health services. These findings identify challenges in service provision that researchers, policymakers and administrators in children's mental health services need to better understand. Policy implications and potential Service Area strategies that could address equitable access to mental health services are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Using a social determinants of health framework, we argue that the majority of evidence-based interventions focused on child and adolescent mental health are limited by their focus on individual youth (and sometimes families). While necessary, these interventions are insufficient for addressing the midstream- and upstream/macro-level determinants of mental health in society. We illustrate our perspective through four examples from youth mental health and related services, in which midstream and upstream interventions—i.e., at the community and public policy levels—need to be prioritized along with downstream treatments to improve population mental health and reduce social inequalities in mental health outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]