CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 65Mental Health Treatment and AccessHealth Policy Implementation SciencePsychiatric care and mental health services

Increased access to evidence‐based primary mental health care: will the implementation match the rhetoric?

Hickie, Ian B, McGorry, Patrick D·2007·Medical Journal of Australia
DOI 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2007.tb01150.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

There is clear evidence that coordinated systems of medical and psychological care ("collaborative care") are superior to single-provider-based treatment regimens. Although other general practice-based mental health schemes promoted collaborative care, the new Medicare Benefits Schedule payments revert largely to individual-provider service systems and fee-for-service rebates. Such systems have previously resulted in high out-of-pocket expenses, poor geographical and socioeconomic distribution of specialist services, and proliferation of individual-provider-based treatments rather than collaborative care. The new arrangements for broad access to psychological therapies should provide the financial basis for major structural reform. Unless this reform is closely monitored for equity of access, degree of out-of-pocket expenses, extent of development of evidence-based collaborative care structures, and impact on young people in the early phases of mental illness, we may waste this opportunity. The responsibility for achieving the best outcome does not lie only with governments. To date, the professions have not placed enough emphasis on systematically adopting evidence-based forms of collaborative care.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2007.tb01150.x

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

Related

Authors
Hickie, I. B., & McGorry, P. D.
Affiliations
  • The University of Sydney (AU)
  • The University of Melbourne (AU)
Corresponding author
Hickie, Ian B
ORCID
Venue
Medical Journal of Australia
Publisher
AMPCo
Published
2007-07
Volume
187
Issue
2
Pages
100-103
ISSN
  • 0025-729X (ISSN-L)
  • 1326-5377
DOI
10.5694/j.1326-5377.2007.tb01150.x
OpenAlex
W2288026780
Cited by
65
References
25
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 3
FWCI
12.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • The Medical Journal of Australia (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychiatric care and mental health services
Keywords
collaborative care, primary care mental health, Medicare Benefits Schedule, mental health service reform, out-of-pocket costs, equitable access, fee-for-service, evidence-based practice
MeSH terms
Australia, Delivery of Health Care, Health Expenditures, Health Services Accessibility, Humans, Mental Health Services, National Health Programs, Primary Health Care, Evidence-Based Medicine

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