Which Non-Pharmaceutical Primary Care Interventions Reduce Inequalities in Common Mental Health Disorders? A Protocol for a Systematic Review of Quantitative and Qualitative Studies

Louise Tanner, Sarah Sowden, Madeleine Still, Katie Thomson, Clare Bambra and Josephine Wildman
Additional contact information
Louise Tanner: Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle NE1 8PB, UK
Sarah Sowden: Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle NE1 8PB, UK
Madeleine Still: Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle NE1 8PB, UK
Katie Thomson: Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle NE1 8PB, UK
Clare Bambra: Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle NE1 8PB, UK
Josephine Wildman: Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle NE1 8PB, UK

IJERPH, 2021, vol. 18, issue 24, 1-12

Abstract: Common mental health disorders (CMDs) represent a major public health concern and are particularly prevalent in people experiencing disadvantage or marginalisation. Primary care is the first point of contact for people with CMDs. Pharmaceutical interventions, such as antidepressants, are commonly used in the treatment of CMDs; however, there is concern that these treatments are over-prescribed and ineffective for treating mental distress related to social conditions. Non-pharmaceutical primary care interventions, such as psychological therapies and “social prescribing”, provide alternatives for CMDs. Little is known, however, about which such interventions reduce social inequalities in CMD-related outcomes, and which may, unintentionally, increase them. The aim of this protocol (PROSPERO registration number CRD42021281166) is to describe how we will undertake a systematic review to assess the effects of non-pharmaceutical primary care interventions on CMD-related outcomes and social inequalities. A systematic review of quantitative, qualitative and mixed-methods primary studies will be undertaken and reported according to the PRISMA-Equity guidance. The following databases will be searched: Assia, CINAHL, Embase, Medline, PsycInfo and Scopus. Retrieved records will be screened according to pre-defined eligibility criteria and synthesised using a narrative approach, with meta-analysis if feasible. The findings of this review will guide efforts to commission more equitable mental health services.

Keywords: mental disorders; healthcare disparities; primary health care; systematic review; health inequalities; PROGRESS-Plus (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/24/12978/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/24/12978/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:24:p:12978-:d:698230

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().