Community co‐produced mental health initiatives in rural Australia: A scoping review

• Published in: The Australian journal of rural health Vol. 29; no. 6; pp. 865 - 878
• Main Authors: De Cotta, Tracy, Knox, Jasmine, Farmer, Jane, White, Carolynne, Davis, Hilary
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Australia Wiley Subscription Services, Inc 01.12.2021
• Subjects: Aboriginal Australians; Access; Art galleries & museums; Australasian cultural groups; Australia; Best practice; Community; community engagement; Community involvement; Design analysis; Early intervention; Evaluation; Health care policy; Health initiatives; Health services; Health Services, Indigenous; Humans; Indigenous Peoples; Mental Health; Mental Health Services; participation; Peers; place‐based; Prevention programs; Public health; Publishing; Reviews; Rural areas; Rural communities; rural health; Rural health care; Rural Population; well‐being; Australia; participation; well-being; place-based; rural health; community engagement
• ISSN: 1038-5282; 1440-1584
• DOI: 10.1111/ajr.12793

Introduction Inaccessibility of mental health services in rural Australia is widely reported. Community co‐produced mental health and well‐being initiatives could fill gaps and complement other services. Objective This scoping review summarises findings from peer‐reviewed articles to identify the key features of co‐produced Australian rural mental health initiatives that engage communities in their design, delivery or evaluation processes. Design Between 2009 and 2019 inclusive, 14 articles met inclusion criteria and were reviewed using Arksey and O'Malley's review methodology. Findings Communities co‐produced initiatives through informing, collaborating and instigating them. Some initiatives operated in specific places, for example an art gallery, while others operated across regions. Only two initiatives involved community members in multiple activities targeting prevention, early intervention, education and service accessibility; other initiatives were more focused, for example designing a new service. Over half of initiatives found were targeted at Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples. Most articles discussed evaluation approaches, though methods were diverse. Discussion Published peer‐reviewed evidence about Australian rural community co‐produced mental health initiatives appears scant. Evidence found suggests they generate a range of supports that could complement or mitigate for lack of, public health services. The overall lack of evidence, diversity of initiatives and inconsistent evaluation makes it difficult to assess effectiveness and which activities might be scaled‐up for wider benefit. Conclusion Rural communities have limited resources, and evidence of what constitutes best practice in co‐producing mental health services would help to avoid ‘reinventing the wheel.’ Greater efforts in evaluating and publishing about initiatives would be helpful.