Introduction
Common
mental health problems are highly prevalent, and
yet a majority of them do not receive treatment.
Apart from poor access to mental health services,
low rate of help-seeking is an important factor
contributing to treatment gap. Research has
consistently shown that men are less likely than
women to seek help for mental health concerns
despite experiencing similar rates of mental
health disorders in general, leading to poorer
mental health outcomes.(1) Studies conducted in
India have also found similar trends, with men
reporting lower levels of mental health-related
help-seeking compared to women.(2) This has been
attributed to internalized masculine norms, which
negatively affect men’s help-seeking behavior,
primarily shaped by socio-cultural factors.(3)
There is a severe dearth of literature on gender
differences in the uptake of and response to
interventions to improve help-seeking.
Implementing gender-sensitive interventions may
increase the uptake of mental health services and
effectiveness of the treatment.(4) Thus, this
study aimed to address the aforementioned gaps by
examining gender differences/similarities observed
in the course of implementing a help-seeking
intervention (Reach Out) for distressed
non-treatment-seeking young adults.
Material and Methods
Young adults
currently distressed and not seeking treatment
(20-35 years) were invited to participate in the
study using online announcements. Participants
were recruited through flyer via various modes on
multiple platforms (social media, word-of-mouth
publicity). The flyer aimed to target young adults
in distress not seeking professional help by
asking self-reflective questions on experience of
depressive mood/anxiety symptoms for two weeks or
more. It also highlighted the prevalence of common
mental health problems and potential benefits of
participation. It provided assurance of
confidentiality, participation link and researcher
contact details. Distress was assessed using the
Kessler Psychological Distress Scale.(5) Those who
scored below the cut-off were excluded from the
study.
Reach Out, a
simple technology-based multi-component
intervention to improve professional help-seeking,
developed based on relevant theoretical frameworks
and a priori guidelines, was used.(6)
The intervention included eight core components
intending to enhance awareness about common mental
health problems, utility of self-help and support
from significant others, and to increase
participants’ skills at understanding when it may
be appropriate to step up to professional
help-seeking.
The intervention was
delivered over eight weeks to responders who met
the eligibility criteria, provided consent and
completed baseline assessments (N=172). PS, a
registered clinical psychologist, was the
facilitator to deliver the intervention. Distress,
barriers, inclination to seek help and
help-seeking from professional sources were
assessed at baseline, post and follow-up.
Participants were assessed using the Barriers to
Seek Professional Help for Mental Health Scale
developed for this study. Help-seeking inclination
was assessed using the General Help Seeking
Questionnaire.(7) A single item yes/no question
assessed help-seeking behaviour from mental health
professionals.
The study was
initiated after approval from the Institute Ethics
Committee (Approval no.: NO.NIMH/DO/IEC (BEH. Sc.
DIV)/2019). The intervention trial was registered
in the ISRCTN registry (ISRCTN14504454). Written
informed consent was sought from all participants
before initiating the study.
Results
Table 1 describes
gender differences on key study variables. Amongst
those who indicated an expression of interest,
about one-third were men, and two-thirds were
women. A significantly higher proportion of women
initiated (66%) online baseline assessment than
men. Out of 201 participants who completed
baseline assessment, 60.8% were women. Gender
differences were not evident in most of the
parameters examined in the study. Mean scores on
overall barriers were significantly higher for
women than men at baseline. There was no
difference in the proportion of men and women
respondents who were excluded due to distress
scores being below the cut-off. Both groups in the
intervention did not differ on distress or
help-seeking inclination from mental health
professionals at baseline. No significant gender
differences were observed once the intervention
delivery began. There were no significant
differences in the proportions of men and women
who initiated the intervention and engaged in more
than four components. As far as the outcomes of
the help-seeking intervention are concerned, both
the subgroups exhibited significant reduction in
barriers to seek professional help and in
distress, and improvement in inclination to seek
help from mental health professionals at
follow-up. There was also no difference in the
proportion of men and women participants who
sought professional help by follow-up.
Table 1: Gender differences on key study
variables
|
Variables
|
Categories
|
z/U/t
|
p
|
Men
|
Women
|
Frequency (%)/Mean (SD)
|
Initiation of baseline assessment (N=336)
|
114 (34%)
|
222 (66.4%)
|
-
|
<0.001*
|
Baseline assessment completed (N=201)
|
66 (57.9%)
|
135 (60.8%)
|
-
|
NS
|
Participants excluded due to below
cut-off K10 distress score (N=29)
|
13/66 (20%)
|
16/135 (12%)
|
1.48†
|
NS
|
Participants who initiated intervention
(N=109) ‡
|
31/53 (58.4%)
|
78/119 (65.5%)
|
0.89†
|
NS
|
High engagers|
(N=54) §
|
16/53 (30.18%)
|
39/119 (32.77%)
|
0.34†
|
NS
|
Baseline barriers (N=172)
|
28.91 (16.8)
|
35.6 (17.7)
|
2378.5||
|
0.01
|
Baseline help-seeking inclination from
MHPs (N=172)
|
4.08 (1.9)
|
4.27 (1.9)
|
-0.82||
|
NS
|
Baseline distress (N=172)
|
29.8 (6.2)
|
31.7 (6.5)
|
-1.76¶
|
0.08
|
Professional help sought by follow-up
(N=41)
|
13/31 (41.9%)
|
28/78 (35.9%)
|
0.56†
|
NS
|
|
Pre
|
Follow-up
|
|
|
Mean (SD)
|
Help-seeking inclination from MHPs (men)**
|
4.26 (1.94)
|
5.53 (1.78)
|
-2.27 ‡‡
|
0.023
|
Help-seeking inclination from MHPs
(women) ††
|
4.48 (1.84)
|
5.39 (1.54)
|
-3.4‡‡
|
0.001
|
Barriers (men)
|
27.11 (17.08)
|
18.74 (11.04)
|
-2.9‡‡
|
0.004
|
Barriers (women)
|
38.93 (19.40)
|
20.17 (14.74)
|
-5.49‡‡
|
<0.001
|
Distress (men)
|
30.68 (5.58)
|
24.68 (10.70)
|
2.85§§
|
0.01
|
Distress (women)
|
32.45 (5.72)
|
23.56 (7.93)
|
-5.92‡‡
|
<0.001
|
MHP= mental health
professional; *binomial test; † difference
between two independent proportions; ‡
Participants who engaged in at least one
intervention component; § participants who
engaged in more than four intervention
components out of seven components; ||
Mann-Whitney U test; ¶
independent samples t test; **
N=19; †† N=54; ‡‡ Wilcoxon Signed Ranks
test; §§ paired-samples t test |
Discussion
Symptoms of
depression, anxiety, and unspecified psychological
distress are two–three times higher among
women.(8) This study primarily focused on
help-seeking for common mental health concerns,
and the announcements focused on low mood and
anxiety symptoms, which could partly explain the
differential enrolment rates of men and women.
However, this may not completely explain the
difference in uptake of the intervention by
distressed young adults. The approach used in the
present study entailed soliciting participation of
distressed non-treatment seekers, which is a
hard-to-access population in the general
community. The recruitment rates in this approach
depend on the proactive expression of interest by
the potential intervention participants. The
sampling bias that is inherent in this approach
could have resulted in lower enrolment of men (as
well as women) who may have relatively strong
levels of reluctance to seek help for common
mental health concerns. Tendency towards help
negation in young adults has been documented in
previous research and is likely to be more evident
in samples of distressed men.(9)
Significantly higher
barriers in women to seek professional help in the
present study may be understandable in the
background of studies that highlight the role of
factors such as socio-cultural power differentials
between genders in the Indian context, related to
access to resources, sense of autonomy, engagement
in caregiving roles, importance accorded to
health, and stigma associated with utilization of
mental health services.(8,10)
The distressed young
women who responded to the present study
announcement were similar to their men
counterparts on help-seeking inclination despite
higher levels of self-reported barriers to seeking
professional help. It is important to note that
these comparisons reflect differences between
responders to the study announcements. It is
plausible that distressed men who were exposed to
the study announcements but did not engage with it
had relatively higher barriers and lower
help-seeking inclination, resulting in lower
uptake of the intervention.
Overall, it appears
that though the intervention uptake was lower in
men than women, both men and women respondents who
enrolled in the study began with similar levels of
distress and inclination and were equally likely
to benefit from the intervention. The findings
point to the need for further research to examine
various approaches to increase the appeal and
uptake of help-seeking interventions in distressed
young men for common mental health concerns.
Conclusion
The findings of the
present study reveal that efforts need to be
invested in research on strategies that may be
applied at the initial stage of recruitment and
uptake of help-seeking for distress in
non-treatment-seeking young men. Using separate
male-centric messaging in terms of content and
depiction of appropriate role models that could
have a higher appeal for men may be useful for
increasing the recruitment rates of men
participants at the outset. Besides the
differential prevalence of common mental health
concerns across genders and the potential role of
the nature of study announcements, other factors
like self-selection/proactive enrolment vs.
screening method for recruitment could also play a
role in the gender composition of the sample,
which need to be explored.
Funding: The
authors received no financial support for the
research, authorship, and/or publication of this
article.
Acknowledgement:
The first author gratefully acknowledges support
from the Indian Council of Medical Research, New
Delhi, India, for fellowship support for her
doctoral work on help-seeking in young adults.
References
- Oliffe JL, Phillips MJ. Men, depression and
masculinities: A review and recommendations. J
Mens Health. 2008 Sep;5(3):194–202.
- Beck AM. Help-Seeking Attitudes in India: The
Role of Collective Self-Esteem, and Emotional
Intelligence. Eastern Illinois University; 2014.
Available from:
https://thekeep.eiu.edu/theses/1286
- Staiger T, Stiawa M, Mueller-Stierlin AS,
Kilian R, Beschoner P, Gündel H, et al.
Masculinity and Help-Seeking Among Men With
Depression: A Qualitative Study. Front
Psychiatry. 2020;11:599039.
- Oliffe JL, Hannan-Leith MN, Ogrodniczuk JS,
Black N, Mackenzie CS, Lohan M, et al. Men’s
depression and suicide literacy: a nationally
representative Canadian survey. J Ment Heal.
2016 Nov 29;25(6):520–6. Available from:
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09638237.2016.1177770
- Kessler RC, Andrews G, Colpe LJ, Hiripi E,
Mroczek DK, Normand SLT, et al. Short screening
scales to monitor population prevalences and
trends in non-specific psychological distress. Psychol
Med. 2002;32(6):959–76.
- Sanghvi P, Mehrotra S, Sharma MK. Development
of a Technology-Based Intervention to Improve
Help-Seeking in Distressed Non-Treatment-Seeking
Young Adults With Common Mental Health Concerns.
Cureus. 2023;15(5):e39108.
- Wilson CJ, Deane FP, Rickwood D. Measuring
help seeking intentions: Properties of the
General Help Seeking Questionnaire. Can J
Couns. 2005;39(1):15–28.
- Malhotra S, Shah R. Women and mental health in
India: An overview. Indian J Psychiatry. 2015;57(6):205.
- Dey M, Jorm AF. Reluctance to seek
professional help among suicidal people: results
from the Swiss Health Survey. Int J Public
Health. 2016 May 30;61(4):495–504.
- Bhattacharya A, Camacho D, Kimberly LL, Lukens
EP. Women’s Experiences and Perceptions of
Depression in India: A Metaethnography. Qual
Health Res. 2019 Jan 12;29(1):80–95.
Available from:
https://journals.lww.com/10.4103/0019-5545.161479
|