Volume 196 - Issue 10
Targeted primary care-based mental health services for young Australians
Author: Melissa Raven
Med J Aust 2012; 196 (10): 627. || doi: 10.5694/mja12.10570
Published online: 4 June 2012
Published online: 4 June 2012
To the Editor: The study of headspace attendees by Scott and colleagues1 illustrates problems common in articles being used for lobbying purposes in the Australian mental health policy arena. These include misrepresentation of evidence, inappropriate medicalisation, and undeclared competing interests.
The authors refer to un(der)employment, lack of engagement in study, and receipt
of income support as ...
To the Editor: The study of headspace attendees by Scott and colleagues1 illustrates problems common in articles being used for lobbying purposes in the Australian mental health policy arena. These include misrepresentation of evidence, inappropriate medicalisation, and undeclared competing interests.
The authors refer to un(der)employment, lack of engagement in study, and receipt of income support as “vocational impairment”. However, a previous headspace study explained that “vocational status” was assessed by asking patients about current employment and study, and whether they received unemployment benefits, a disability support pension, or other government financial assistance.2 Scott and colleagues should therefore have reported vocational status as a demographic finding, not vocational impairment under the heading “Disability and impairment ratings”.
Other problems in academic rigour are apparent. The authors dismiss a key finding from the 1997 National Survey of Mental Health and Wellbeing3 as a “belief”, contrasting it unfavourably with the findings of their own far less rigorous study. Other studies are very tenuously relevant to the claims that they are cited to support, including the supposed benefits of early intervention and the purported exclusion of young people from mental health services. There is also heavy reliance on self-citation to justify claims.
Neither Scott’s nor Hickie’s associations with Servier, manufacturer of the antidepressant Valdoxan (agomelatine), were disclosed. Hickie has promoted the use of agomelatine for early-onset depression among youth.4 Both Scott and Hickie were presenters at one or more Servier depression masterclasses in early 2011.5 This competing interest should have been declared. The Journal’s instructions for authors give a similar example of “Mary Mild”, who reports receiving speaker’s fees for meetings organised by Roche.
Competing interests
No relevant disclosures.
References
- Scott EM, Hermens DF, Glozier N, et al. Targeted primary care-based mental health services for young Australians. Med J Aust 2012; 196: 136-140. 0_CHDCJCBI
- Hamilton BA, Naismith SL, Scott EM, et al. Disability is already pronounced in young people with early stages of affective disorders: data from an early intervention service. J Affect Disord 2011; 131: 84-91. 0_i1142866
- Meadows G, Burgess P, Bobevski I, et al. Perceived need for mental health care: influences of diagnosis, demography and disability. Psychol Med 2002; 32: 299-309. 0_i1142870
- Mayze T. Servier Foundation depression masterclass conference review. Nov 2010. Geelong: Research Review Australia, 2010. 0_i1142871
- Servier Foundation. NSW depression masterclass; 2011 Feb 19-20. Melbourne: Servier Foundation, 2011. 0_i1142873