Cited by 167Mental Health Treatment and AccessPsychiatric care and mental health servicesPsychology and Mental Health

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 71 of the 73 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

‘You’re on the waiting list’: An interpretive phenomenological analysis of young adults’ experiences of waiting lists within mental health services in the UK

Open access

Abstract

Waiting lists in mental health services are currently considered too long. Lengthy waits of up to 18 weeks are commonly reported in the UK. Waiting lists have long been associated with a variety of negative psychological responses, however there is little understanding behind young adults’ personal experiences of such delays within mental health services. The current study aimed to explore young adults’ experiences of waiting lists in mental healthcare in the UK. Seven young adults were interviewed in the current study (aged 19–22). Interpretive phenomenological analysis was utilised to explore participant accounts. Three super-ordinate themes were generated: Reliance on Alternative Methods of Support; Inability to Function Sufficiently; and Emergence of Negative Beliefs, Emotions and Thoughts. Participants primarily reported a variety of negative psychological and behavioural consequences associated with waiting lists in mental health services, as well as exacerbated existing physical and psychological health issues. In accordance with the limited number of previous studies, waiting lists are considered by patients to be barriers to mental health support and intervention. Future direction is advised.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1371/journal.pone.0265542

Cites

71 of 71 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 73 references

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. Department of Health & Social Care, 2014, Achieving Better Access to Mental Health Services by 2020, Dep Health, 23
  2. NHS National Services Scotland, 2019, Psychological Therapies Waiting Times in NHS Scotland—Report, 30
  3. British Medical Association, 2017, Breaking down barriers- the challenge of improving mental health outcomes
  4. SP Singh, 2010, Transition from CAMHS to Adult Mental Health Services (TRACK): A Study of Service Organisation, Policies, Process and User and Carer Perspectives, National Institute for Health Research Service Delivery and Organisation programme, 252
  5. P. Brown, The invisible problem? Improving students’ mental health, 66
  6. MJ Zimmer-Gembeck, 2016, Developmental psychopathology: Risk, resilience, and intervention, 485
  7. E Byrne, 2015, Peer Interviewing in qualitative interpretive studies: An art in collecting culturally sensitive data?, BMC Res Notes, 8

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 167

Metadata

Authors
Punton, G., Dodd, A. L., & McNeill, A.
Affiliations
Northumbria University (GB)
Corresponding author
Punton, Georgia
Venue
PLOS ONE
Published
2022-03-18
Volume
17
Issue
3
Pages
e0265542
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4220983246
Cited by
167
References
73
Citations by year
2026: 50 · 2025: 52 · 2024: 34 · 2023: 27 · 2022: 4
FWCI
27.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Northumbria Research Link (Northumbria University) (acceptedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Durham Research Online (Durham University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychiatric care and mental health services
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychology and Mental Health
Keywords
waiting lists, mental health services, young adults, patient experience, treatment delay, psychological impact, barriers to mental health care, access to mental health care
MeSH terms
United Kingdom, Humans, Mental Health, Mental Health Services, Waiting Lists, Young Adult

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