Anthony F. Jorm|Yoshibumi Nakane|Helen Christensen|Kumiko Yoshioka|Kathleen M Griffiths|Yuji Wata
Public beliefs about treatment and outcome of mental disorders: a comparison of Australia and Japan
Orygen|University of Melbourne|Nagasaki International University|Australian National University|Nagasaki International University|Australian National University|Bunkyo Gakuin University
abstract background surveys public number countries shown poor recognition mental disorders beliefs treatment often diverge health professionals lack mental health literacy limit optimal use treatment services australia japan countries different mental health care systems japan emphasising hospital care australia oriented community care japan also collectivist australia individualist values differences might influence recognition disorders beliefs treatment two countries methods surveys public carried country using similar methodology feasible countries household interviews carried concerning beliefs relation one four case vignettes describing either depression depression suicidal thoughts early schizophrenia chronic schizophrenia australia survey involved national sample 3998 adults aged 18 years japan survey involved 2000 adults aged 20 69 25 regional sites spread across country results japanese public found reluctant use psychiatric labels particularly depression cases japanese also reluctant discuss mental disorders others outside family strong belief counsellors gps generally believe benefits treatment optimistic full recovery contrast australians used psychiatric labels often particularly depression also positive benefits seeking professional help strong preference lifestyle interventions tended negative psychiatric medications australians positive counsellors gps psychiatric hospitalization ect seen negatively countries conclusion major differences australia japan recognition disorders beliefs treatment may relate different health care systems increasing openness mental health australia also likely explanatory factor