Sociodemographic predictors of attitudes to support seeking from a medical doctor or other health provider among rural Australians
Abstract
Background Rural Australians experience higher prevalence of several chronic diseases than metropolitan Australians and are less likely to access supportive health services. This study explored associations of sociodemographic factors and barriers to support seeking for health in a sample of rural South Australians.Methods Participants (n = 610) from three rural regions participated in a computer-assisted telephone interview (CATI), based on the Barriers to Help Seeking Scale. Each participant reported on barriers in one of three health contexts: 'general' physical health, skin cancer, and mental health. Sociodemographic factors included gender, age, highest education, region of residence, and presence of chronic conditions. Chi-squared Automatic Interaction Detection (CHAID) determined independent associations of sociodemographic factors and barrier categories (high, medium and low importance).Results Privacy was a high-importance barrier in the mental health context, particularly among participants of age < 63 years. The tendency to minimise and normalise health issues was also a high-importance barrier in the mental health context. In the physical health context, those with a chronic condition were more likely to perceive normalisation as a barrier than those without a chronic condition. Need for control and self-reliance was a high-importance barrier in the mental health context and a low-importance barrier in the skin cancer context, particularly among participants < 63 years. Structural factors and distrust of providers were high-importance barriers among those who did not complete secondary education, regardless of context.Conclusion This study highlights the importance of a nuanced approach to promoting help-seeking in rural Australians, with message content and delivery tailored to specific health conditions and demographic circumstances.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Low-threshold and remotely delivered preventive interventions, like telephone coaching, are warranted for farmers who experience multiple risk factors for depression, live in underserved areas, and show low help-seeking behavior.
“Low-threshold and remotely delivered preventive interventions, like telephone coaching, are warranted for farmers who experience multiple risk factors for depression, live in underserved areas, and show low help-seeking behavior.”
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 43 · Cited by 8
- Authors
- Dollman, J., Gunn, K. M., & Hull, M. J.
- Affiliations
- University of South Australia (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Hull, Melissa Joan
- Venue
- International Journal of Behavioral Medicine
- Published
- 2021-04-08
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 616-626
- ISSN
- 1070-5503 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-7558
- OpenAlex
- W3142231037
- Cited by
- 8
- References
- 43
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1
- FWCI
- 1.47
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International Journal of Behavioral Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- UniSA Research Outputs Repository (University of South Australia) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
- Social Sciences › Health › Public Health and Social Inequalities
- Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
- Keywords
- help-seeking barriers, help-seeking attitudes, rural health, sociodemographic factors, mental health help-seeking, chronic disease, privacy concerns, self-reliance, health promotion messaging, South Australia
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review