Cited by 291Mental Health Treatment and AccessPsychiatric care and mental health servicesChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development

Changes in psychological distress and psychosocial functioning in young people visiting headspace centres for mental health problems

Open access
Rickwood, Debra J, Mazzer, Kelly R, Telford, Nic R, Parker, Alexandra G, Tanti, Chris J, McGorry, Patrick D·2015·Medical Journal of Australia

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To examine changes in psychological distress and psychosocial functioning in young people presenting to headspace centres across Australia for mental health problems. DESIGN: Analysis of routine data collected from headspace clients who had commenced an episode of care between 1 April 2013 and 31 March 2014, and at 90-day follow-up. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 24 034 people aged 12-25 years who had first presented to one of the 55 fully established headspace centres for mental health problems during the data collection period. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Main reason for presentation, types of therapeutic services provided, Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10) scores, and Social and Occupational Functioning Assessment Scale (SOFAS) scores. RESULTS: Most headspace mental health clients presented with symptoms of depression and anxiety and were likely to receive cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT). Younger males were more likely than other age- and sex-defined groups to present for anger and behavioural problems, while younger females were more likely to present for deliberate self-harm. From presentation to last assessment, over one-third of clients had significant improvements in psychological distress (K10) and a similar proportion in psychosocial functioning (SOFAS). Sixty per cent of clients showed significant improvement on one or both measures. CONCLUSIONS: Data regarding outcomes for young people using mental health care services similar to headspace centres are scarce, but the current results compare favourably with those reported overseas, and show positive outcomes for young people using headspace centres.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5694/mja14.01696

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • These rates of session progression are not dissimilar to those found in other large-scale, open-access eHealth interventions such as MoodGym or in face-to-face clinic service delivery contexts such as headspace.

    “These rates of session progression are not dissimilar to those found in other large-scale, open-access eHealth interventions such as MoodGym (in a sample of 82,159 participants, 63% completed no modules, 27% completed only 1 module, and 10% completed 2 or more modules out of 5 modules) [25] or even in face-to-face clinic service delivery contexts such as headspace (mean sessions attended 4.1; 49%”
  • In headspace Australia, post-treatment, young people had decreased psychological distress (47%), improved wellbeing (82%), significant symptomatic or functional improvement (60%), and statistically significant reductions in suicidal ideation.

    “post-treatment, young people had decreased psychological distress (47%), improved wellbeing (82%), significant symptomatic or functional improvement (60%), statistically significant reductions in suicidal ideation”

    From The Lancet Psychiatry Commission on youth mental health (2024) · cites this paper as [308]

  • In headspace Australia, 74% of young people have high or very high severity of psychological distress at entry.

    “74% of young people have high or very high severity of psychological distress at entry”

    From The Lancet Psychiatry Commission on youth mental health (2024) · cites this paper as [308]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 15 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rickwood, D. J., Mazzer, K. R., Telford, N. R., Parker, A. G., Tanti, C. J., & McGorry, P. D.
Affiliations
  • University of Canberra (AU)
  • headspace. The National Youth Mental Health Foundation, Melbourne, VIC.
  • The University of Melbourne (AU)
Corresponding author
Rickwood, Debra J
Venue
Medical Journal of Australia
Publisher
AMPCo
Published
2015-06
Volume
202
Issue
10
Pages
537-542
ISSN
  • 0025-729X (ISSN-L)
  • 1326-5377
OpenAlex
W2266283792
Cited by
291
References
15
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 96 · 2016: 82 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 1
FWCI
107.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Medical Journal of Australia (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Victoria University Research Repository (Victoria University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Australian Government
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychiatric care and mental health services
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Keywords
youth, psychological distress, psychosocial functioning, depression, anxiety, cognitive behavioral therapy, self-harm, Kessler K10
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Anxiety, Australia, Child, Community Mental Health Centers, Community Mental Health Services, Counseling, Depression, Female, Humans, Male, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Stress, Psychological, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Self-Injurious Behavior, 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