Cited by 105Mental Health Treatment and AccessAgriculture and Farm SafetyGender Roles and Identity Studies

A comparison of barriers to mental health support‐seeking among farming and non‐farming adults in rural South Australia

Hull, Melissa J., Fennell, Kate M., Vallury, Kari, Jones, Martin, Dollman, James·2017·Australian Journal of Rural Health

Abstract

Objective: To assess the differences between farming and non‐farming rural adults in perceived barriers to mental health service use. Design: A cross‐sectional survey, modified from the Barriers to Help‐Seeking Scale ( BHSS ), was conducted using a computer‐assisted telephone interview. Setting: Respondents (age 52.6 ± 11.6 years) were recruited from three rural regions of South Australia. Participants: Approximately, 78 non‐farmers and 45 farmers were included in analyses. 78 retired and two unemployed participants were excluded from the analyses. Main outcome measure: Farmers and non‐farmers were compared on domain scores and individual item responses from the adapted BHSS that represent ‘agrarian’ attitudes to support‐seeking for mental health: stoicism, self‐reliance, minimisation of the problem, stigma and distrust of health professionals. Results: In the analysis of domain scores, ‘Need for Control and Self‐Reliance’ was a stronger barrier for farmers than non‐farmers ( P = 0.009) with a trend ( P = 0.07) towards stronger barriers among farmers in the ‘Minimising Problem and Resignation’ domain. In the analysis of item‐level responses, there was a difference ( P = 0.03) between farmers and non‐farmers in responses to ‘I find it difficult to understand my doctor/health professional’, with 24.4% of the farmers agreeing that this is a barrier compared with 15.3% of the non‐farmers. Conclusion: Long‐held stereotypes of stoicism and self‐reliance among farmers were somewhat supported, in the context of mental health. Mental health services and professionals in rural Australia might need to adapt their practices to successfully engage this population.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/ajr.12352

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hull, M. J., Fennell, K. M., Vallury, K., Jones, M., & Dollman, J.
Affiliations
  • University of South Australia (AU)
  • Sansom Institute for Health Research University of South Australia Adelaide South Australia Australia
Corresponding author
Hull, Melissa J.
Venue
Australian Journal of Rural Health
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-06-15
Volume
25
Issue
6
Pages
347-353
ISSN
  • 1038-5282 (ISSN-L)
  • 1440-1584
OpenAlex
W2625726938
Cited by
105
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 5
FWCI
8.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Australian Journal of Rural Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Adelaide Research & Scholarship (AR&S) (University of Adelaide) (submittedVersion)
Funders
University of South Australia
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Agriculture and Farm Safety
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender Roles and Identity Studies
Keywords
mental health help-seeking, help-seeking barriers, farmers, rural mental health, stigma, self-reliance, Stoicism, rural South Australia
MeSH terms
Farmers, Adult, Aged, Australia, Cross-Sectional Studies, Female, Humans, Male, Mental Health Services, Middle Aged, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Rural Population

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