The Influence of Non-Clinical Patient Factors on Clinical Decision Making: Uncovering the Impact on Mental Health

Main Article Content

Lauren Burns
Ana Sergio da Silva
Ann John
Published online: Nov 21, 2019


Background
Understanding how non-clinical patient factors (NCpF) such as gender, educational level and socioeconomic status impact clinical decisions regarding one’s mental health is important for appropriate and equitable care.


Main Aim
This research aims to i) investigate the feasibility of using administrative health data to investigate clinical decision making in mental health; ii) understand the impact of NCpF on mental health-related diagnosis, treatment, and referral decisions.


Methods/Approach
Three waves of the Welsh Health Survey, containing a five-item Mental Health Inventory (Short- Form SF36), and NCpF information were used to create our interest cohort.


The records with a low SF36, a ‘gold standard’ identifier of common mental health conditions, were then linked to the healthcare records datasets (Primary Care GP Dataset, Patient Episode Database for Wales, Emergency Department Dataset, Outpatient Referral Dataset, Annual District Death Extract) securely stored on the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage Databank.


Results
We will present the methodological challenges and benefits of using administrative data the study of decision making in mental health.


The differences in NCpF between those with a low SF36 and a mental health diagnosis, symptoms and treatment as well as those with a similar SF36 score but no diagnosis, symptoms or treatment recorded will be presented and discussed.


Conclusion
Administrative data can provide a unique opportunity to investigate issues related with clinical decision-making in mental health and improve health equity. Having a better understanding of the influence of NCpF on mental health decisions is necessary to prevent inequity in mental health care.


Background

Understanding how non-clinical patient factors (NCpF) such as gender, educational level and socioeconomic status impact clinical decisions regarding one’s mental health is important for appropriate and equitable care.

Main Aim

This research aims to i) investigate the feasibility of using administrative health data to investigate clinical decision making in mental health; ii) understand the impact of NCpF on mental health-related diagnosis, treatment, and referral decisions.

Methods/Approach

Three waves of the Welsh Health Survey, containing a five-item Mental Health Inventory (Short- Form SF36), and NCpF information were used to create our interest cohort.

The records with a low SF36, a ‘gold standard’ identifier of common mental health conditions, were then linked to the healthcare records datasets (Primary Care GP Dataset, Patient Episode Database for Wales, Emergency Department Dataset, Outpatient Referral Dataset, Annual District Death Extract) securely stored on the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage Databank.

Results

We will present the methodological challenges and benefits of using administrative data the study of decision making in mental health.

The differences in NCpF between those with a low SF36 and a mental health diagnosis, symptoms and treatment as well as those with a similar SF36 score but no diagnosis, symptoms or treatment recorded will be presented and discussed.

Conclusion

Administrative data can provide a unique opportunity to investigate issues related with clinical decision-making in mental health and improve health equity. Having a better understanding of the influence of NCpF on mental health decisions is necessary to prevent inequity in mental health care.

Article Details


Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 > >>