Developing a hope-focused intervention to prevent mental health problems and improve social outcomes for young women who are not in education, employment, or training (NEET): A qualitative co-design study in deprived coastal communities in South-East England.

Young women who are not in education, employment, or training (NEET) experience poorer health and social outcomes compared to non-NEET young women and to NEET young men, especially in deprived areas with intersecting inequalities. The evidence on effective public health approaches is scarce. Interventions that target hope, which NEET young women notably lack, offer a promising theory-driven and intuitive means to prevent mental health problems and improve social outcomes. Hope can be defined as a goal-focused mindset comprising self-agency (motivation and self-belief) and pathways (identifying routes to achieving goals). Hope is implicated in a variety of evidence-based psychosocial interventions for young people, but is not directly targeted by existing prevention programmes for NEET populations. The current study used a phased qualitative research design and participatory methods to model a hope-focused intervention for NEET young women. Phase 1 investigated population needs and intervention parameters through semi-structured interviews with 28 key informants living or working in disadvantaged coastal communities in South-East England. The sample comprised eight NEET young women, four family members, and 16 practitioners from relevant support organisations. Phase 2 refined intervention parameters and outcomes through co-design sessions with four NEET young women, followed by a theory of change workshop with 10 practitioners. The resulting intervention model is articulated as a mentor-supported, in-person psychosocial intervention that builds hope by enhancing positive sense of self and time spent in meaningful activities, before explicitly teaching the skills needed to identify, set, and pursue personally meaningful goals.

Barriers and facilitators to seeking and accessing mental health support in primary care and the community among female migrants in Europe: a "feminisms" systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Recent years have seen record levels of migration to Europe. Female migrants are at heightened risk of developing mental health disorders, yet they face barriers to accessing mental health services in their host countries. This systematic review aims to summarise the barriers and facilitators to accessing mental health support for female migrants in Europe. METHODS: The review follows PRISMA guidelines, and the protocol was pre-published on PROSPERO. Six electronic databases were searched: CINAHL, Global Health Database, Medline, PsycARTICLES, PsycINFO and Web of Science. Thematic analysis was undertaken on the identified studies. A feminist quality appraisal tool was applied. RESULTS: Eight qualitative, six quantitative and five mixed methods studies were identified. Barriers included a lack of information, stigma, religious and cultural practices and beliefs, and a lack of consideration of gender-specific needs within the health system. Gender-sensitive services, supportive general practitioners and religious leaders facilitated access. CONCLUSIONS: The design of mental health research, services, policies, and commissioning of support for migrants must consider female migrant needs. Mental health support services must be culturally aware and gender sensitive. REGISTRATION: The review protocol was registered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO, registration number CRD42021235571.

Patients' perspectives of barriers and facilitators to accessing support through primary care for common mental health problems in England: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Common mental disorders (CMDs) are prevalent throughout the population. Psychological therapy is often sought via primary care; however, equitable access is not commonplace. This review aims to investigate the barriers and facilitators adults experiencing CMDs perceive when accessing evidence-based psychological treatment in England. METHODS: A qualitative systematic review with meta-synthesis was conducted (PROSPERO CRD42020227039). Seven electronic databases were searched for papers from 2008 to October 2022. RESULTS: Searches identified 30 studies from which three themes were developed with seven subthemes. Stigma and patients' perceptions and understandings of CMDs impacted their help-seeking decision-making and engagement with services. This meant that services were not used as a first resort for help-seeking. Upon reaching services, patients appeared to perceive primary care as not prioritising mental health problems, nor as being the place where they would be supported, particularly as healthcare professionals did not appear to know about CMDs and therapy was seen as difficult to access. The interaction between healthcare professional and patients was seen as pivotal to whether patients accessed support or not. LIMITATIONS: The review is limited to research conducted within England. Additionally, it only explores access barriers prior to treatment experiences. CONCLUSION: Knowledge, attitudinal, systemic and relational barriers and facilitators were identified. Future research should focus on developing stigma reduction initiatives. Clinical implications include provision of standardised training across primary care HCP (healthcare professionals).