This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIR Mental Health, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on http://mental.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.
There has been limited research on the information needs and preferences of the public concerning treatment for depression. Very little research is available comparing samples and opinions when recruitment for surveys is done over the Web as opposed to a personal invitation to complete a paper survey.
This study aimed to (1) to explore information needs and preferences among members of the public and (2) compare Clinic and Web samples on sample characteristics and survey findings.
Web survey participants were recruited with a notice on three self-help association websites (N=280). Clinic survey participants were recruited by a research assistant in the waiting rooms of a family medicine clinic and a walk-in medical clinic (N=238) and completed a paper version of the survey.
The Clinic and Web samples were similar in age (39.0 years, SD 13.9 vs 40.2 years, SD 12.5, respectively), education, and proportion in full time employment. The Clinic sample was more diverse in demographic characteristics and closer to the demographic characteristics of the region (Winnipeg, Canada) with a higher proportion of males (102/238 [42.9%] vs 45/280 [16.1%]) and nonwhites (Aboriginal, Asian, and black) (69/238 [29.0%] vs 39/280 [13.9%]). The Web sample reported a higher level of emotional distress and had more previous psychological (224/280 [80.0%] vs 83/238 [34.9%]) and pharmacological (202/280 [72.1%] vs 57/238 [23.9%]) treatment. In terms of opinions, most respondents in both settings saw information on a wide range of topics around depression treatment as very important including information about treatment choices, effectiveness of treatment, how long it takes treatment to work, how long treatment continues, what happens when treatment stops, advantages and disadvantages of treatments, and potential side effects. Females, respondents with a white background, and those who had received or felt they would have benefited from therapy in the past saw more information topics as very important. Those who had received or thought they would have benefited in the past from medication treatment saw fewer topics as important. Participants in both groups expressed an interest in receiving information through discussion with a counselor or a physician, through written brochures, or through a recommended website.
The recruitment strategies were helpful in obtaining opinions from members of the public with different concerns and perspectives, and the results from the two methods were complementary. Persons coping with emotional distress and individuals not specifically seeking help for depression would be interested in information to answer a wide range of important questions about depression treatment. The Clinic sample yielded more cultural diversity that is a closer match to the population. The Web sample was less costly to recruit and included persons who were most interested in receiving information.
Major depression is one of the most common and disabling mental health problems in the community [
Health information preferences are influenced by attitudinal and motivational factors [
Whereas there is a great deal of health information on the Web, and the public increasingly uses the Web to access health information [
Obtaining the opinions of those who may be interested in specific types of health information is challenging in survey research. The most favorable research situation [
With the increased use of the Web in the last 20 years, Web-survey research has become very prevalent. There has been limited research comparing the results when recruitment is done over the Web (responding to a mass mailing or clicking on a link in a posted invitation) as opposed to being done with a personal invitation to complete a paper survey in a community setting [
One advantage of traditional survey administration is that it is possible to determine response rate. Whether the survey is administered via mail or email invitations to specific persons or when participants are approached in a medical clinic waiting room in person, researchers are able to determine how many persons responded out of the total number invited to participate. It is also possible to obtain more information about the representativeness of respondents as compared with nonrespondents when there is a sampling frame with detailed information about those invited to participate. In surveys carried out in public areas (such as a medical waiting room), it is possible to gather information about respondents but no information is available on the characteristic of nonrespondents. For both the medical clinic survey and the Web survey, it is possible to compare the characteristics of respondents with characteristics of persons in the region.
Web survey recruitment and administration, on the other hand, has the advantage of lower cost and of reaching a broader audience, that is, people that differ demographically and geographically [
Professionals commonly produce resources for the public with limited knowledge of what information is of interest to consumers and the public at large. Hence, there remains a need to understand the information needs and preferences of the public concerning treatment choices for depression. The first aim was to explore the following questions using two different survey approaches: (1) What information would be important to members of the public? (2) To whom would they turn for advice? (3) How would they prefer to receive information? and (4) What treatment services would they see as most helpful if they were experiencing problems with depression?
The second aim of this study was to compare respondent characteristics and information needs and preferences between participants recruited in a clinical setting for paper surveys and those recruited on the Web through self-help organization websites.
This study was approved by the University of Manitoba Research Ethics Board (REB).
This survey was conducted in two medical clinics in Winnipeg, Canada. One was a large clinic near a teaching hospital where patients had scheduled appointments with family physicians. The second clinic, near a large shopping center, provided both walk-in services and a limited number of scheduled appointments with family physicians. Under Canada’s publicly funded health care system, there is no charge for physician visits. Of 340 patients in the waiting rooms invited to complete the survey, 241 agreed to participate and 231 were included in the analyses (67.9% of the total).
Persons visiting the websites of the Anxiety Disorders Association of Manitoba, the Canadian Mental Health Association (Winnipeg Region), and the Mood Disorders Association of Manitoba were invited to participate in the survey by a notice posted on each of these websites (see
A research assistant invited persons waiting for appointments to participate. Those who provided consent completed the 20-min anonymous survey in the waiting room. An honorarium (a gift card, Can $5 value) was provided.
The same measures were used in the Web survey as in the Clinic survey. After the participants provided their consent, they were presented with the survey. Enrollment continued for approximately 2 months without providing compensation to participants. After 2 months of data collection, in order to increase participation, we provided a $10 gift card to a grocery or coffee retailer as compensation for participation. Whereas 280 participants answered the demographic questions, approximately 262 individuals answered the information needs and preferences questions. Just over half (54.3%) of this group of respondents received an honorarium for participating in the study. The survey duration was approximately 20 min.
In developing questions, we considered what information might be important to a well-informed person making treatment decisions. The questions considered the logical sequence of events in decisions about treatment: treatment choices; the characteristics of each treatment; treatment cost, effectiveness, and duration; what happens when the treatment is stopped; and the risks of treatment. Draft questions were reviewed in a consensus meeting involving members of a self-help anxiety association, psychiatrists and psychologists specializing in the treatment of anxiety, and a family physician from a teaching clinic. There was a high degree of consensus on the final questions. These questions have been used in previous research on information needs of young adults [
Participants provided information concerning their gender, age, marital status, education level, main activity (employment), and cultural or ethnic background.
To set the context, respondents read a vignette describing a person with depression matching their gender. The vignette was brief (7 lines) and described a person with significant depression meeting five of the nine Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-5 (DSM-5) criteria for major depression [
Then participants were asked 5 questions about the medium they would prefer in receiving information. They were also asked, “How likely would you be to talk to one of the following people for advice if you were having a serious problem with depression?” and a list of options was provided. Next participants were asked: “If YOU were having difficulty with depression at some point in your life, how helpful would the following be?” and a list of service options was provided. Finally, participants were asked about past treatment experience.
Current emotional distress was assessed using the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K6), a validated measure of anxiety and depressive symptoms [
IBM SPSS statistics version 23.0 was used to conduct the data analysis. Demographic characteristics between the 2 samples were compared using independent samples
We conducted a linear regression analysis to explore the sociodemographic predictors of the number of information topics considered to be very important by participants in the Clinic sample with different characteristics. We were particularly interested in the relationships between information needs and previous experience with depression and its treatment as predictors.
In the Clinic sample, the mean age of participants was 40 years, and it was reasonably well balanced for gender with 57.1% being female (136/238;
Sample characteristics.
Characteristics | Clinic sample |
Web sample |
Statistical |
|||
Mean age (SDa) | 39.0 (13.90) | 40.2 (12.47) | .33 | |||
χ21=48.4 | <.001b | |||||
Female | 136 (57.1) | 235 (83.9) | ||||
Male | 102 (42.9) | 45 (16.1) | ||||
χ21=17.6 | <.001b | |||||
Yes | 169 (71.0) | 241 (86.1) | ||||
No | 69 (29.0) | 39 (13.9) | ||||
χ21=5.1 | .03b | |||||
Yes | 145 (60.9) | 143 (51.1) | ||||
No | 93 (39.1) | 137 (48.9) | ||||
Working full-time proportion, n (%) | 143 (60.0) | 148 (52.9) | χ21=2.7 | .10 | ||
Mean years education (SD) | 13.8 (3.80) | 14.1 (5.21) | .57 | |||
Distress score (SD) | 5.1 (4.57) | 10.5 (6.14) | <.001b | |||
Received counseling for depression, n (% yes) | 83 (34.9) | 224 (80.0) | χ21=103.9 | <.001b | ||
Counseling for depression would have been helpful but not received, n (% yes) | 88 (37.0) | 210 (75.0) | χ21=72.9 | <.001b | ||
Received medication for depression, n (% yes) | 57 (24.0) | 202 (72.1) | χ21=112.6 | <.001b | ||
Medication for depression would have been helpful but not received, n (% yes) | 33 (13.9) | 106 (37.9) | χ21=103.9 | <.001b |
aSD: standard deviation.
bSignificantly different means or proportions between the 2 samples, where
The Clinic sample was minimally distressed with an average K6 score of 5.1 (K6 sum scores range from 0 to 24). In contrast, the Web sample was significantly more distressed with a K6 score of 10.5 (
Treatment options: What information would be important to you if you were considering help (for yourself, a close friend, or a close family member)?
Information type | Clinic sample |
Web sample |
||
Very important |
Mean rating |
Very important |
Mean rating |
|
All available treatments | 164 (71.0) | 6.4 (6.16-6.66) | 233 (88.9) | 7.2 (7.09-7.40)a |
Available medication treatments | 134 (58.0) | 5.7 (5.47-6.03) | 183 (69.9) | 6.3 (6.11-6.57)a |
Available counseling or psychological treatments | 162 (70.1) | 6.3 (6.06-6.58) | 233 (88.9) | 7.2 (7.06-7.40)a |
Self-help treatment | 88 (38.1) | 4.8 (4.46-5.06) | 204 (77.9) | 6.7 (6.44-6.85)a |
Herbal remedies | 81 (35.1) | 4.3 (4.00-4.63) | 110 (42.0) | 4.7 (4.37-4.95) |
Exercise | 157 (68.0) | 6.0 (5.76-6.30) | 194 (74.1) | 6.5 (6.25-6.70) |
Meditation | 122 (52.8) | 5.4 (5.07-5.65) | -c | - |
Bright light therapy | 104 (45.0) | 4.9 (4.58-5.19) | 173 (66.0) | 5.8 (5.59-6.09)a |
What you have to do as part of the treatment | 164 (71.0) | 6.3 (6.06-6.56) | 228 (87.0) | 7.1 (6.92-7.29)a |
Cost of treatment to you | 139 (60.2) | 5.7 (5.38-6.01) | 207 (79.0) | 6.8 (6.55-7.01)a |
Cost of treatment to health care system | 81 (35.1) | 4.3 (3.99-4.63) | 68 (26.0) | 3.8 (3.48-4.06) |
Effectiveness of treatment | 201 (87.0) | 7.1 (6.85-7.25) | 236 (90.1) | 7.3 (7.12-7.45) |
How treatment works | 199 (85.6) | 6.8 (6.60-7.05) | 225 (85.9) | 7.0 (6.85-7.21) |
Goal or outcome of treatment | 201 (86.1) | 7.1 (6.86-7.26) | 238 (90.8) | 7.3 (7.12-7.43) |
How long it takes for treatment to produce results | 173 (74.9) | 6.4 (6.11-6.60) | 218 (83.2) | 6.9 (6.69-7.07)a |
How long treatment continues | 168 (72.7) | 6.3 (6.09-6.57) | 215 (82.1) | 6.8 (6.59-6.98)a |
What happens when treatment stops | 199 (86.1) | 7.0 (6.74-7.16) | 233 (88.9) | 7.2 (6.99-7.34) |
Common side effects of treatment | 194 (84.0) | 6.9 (6.70-7.10) | 228 (87.0) | 7.1 (6.95-7.30) |
Uncommon but serious side effects of treatment | 194 (84.0) | 6.9 (6.67-7.10) | 212 (80.9) | 6.8 (6.62-7.01) |
Advantages and disadvantages of treatment | 189 (81.8) | 6.8 (6.58-7.00) | 233 (88.9) | 7.1 (6.95-7.30) |
aWeb sample and Clinic sample CIs do not overlap.
bEach source was rated on a 9-point rating scale with the anchors 0-2 (not important), 3-5 (moderately important), and 6-8 (very important).
c“-” indicates items in Clinic but not Web survey.
In the Clinic sample, respondents reported that if they were having serious problems with depression, they would be very likely to speak with a romantic partner or spouse (63.2%, 146/231), a family doctor (60.2%, 139/231), or a counselor or therapist (58.9%, 136/231; see
How likely would you be to talk to one of the following people for advice if you were having a serious problem with depression?
Source of advice | Clinic sample |
Web sample |
||
Very likely |
Mean rating |
Very likely |
Mean rating |
|
Romantic partner or spouse | 146 (63.2) | 5.8 (5.53-6.14) | 160 (61.2) | 5.7 (5.33-5.97) |
Parent | 86 (37.2) | 4.1 (3.76-4.52) | 68 (26.0) | 3.4 (3.10-3.78) |
Family member (not parent) | 74 (32.0) | 4.0 (3.65-4.32) | 76 (29.0) | 3.8 (3.48-4.12) |
Friend | 106 (45.9) | 5.0 (4.64-5.25) | 139 (53.1) | 5.2 (4.92-5.49) |
Phone-in counseling or health line | 69 (29.9) | 3.8 (3.47-4.16) | 81 (30.9) | 3.99 (3.69-4.29) |
Counselor or therapist | 136 (58.9) | 5.5 (5.21-5.82) | 210 (80.2) | 6.7 (6.43-6.88)a |
Religious leader or community elder | 35 (15.2) | 2.1 (1.74-2.45) | 45 (17.2) | 2.1 (1.75-2.44) |
Family doctor | 139 (60.2) | 5.7 (5.39-6.00) | 183 (69.9) | 6.1 (5.81-6.34) |
aWeb sample and Clinic sample CIs do not overlap.
bEach source was rated on a 9-point rating scale with the anchors 0-2 (not likely), 3-5 (moderately likely), and 6-8 (very likely).
There are several ways to receive information about depression and its treatment.
Preferred method of receiving information about services.
Preferred method | Clinic sample |
Web sample |
||
Very preferred |
Mean rating |
Very preferred |
Mean rating |
|
Written form (information sheet) | 116 (50.2) | 5.3 (5.02-5.59) | 162 (61.8) | 6.0 (5.76-6.27)a |
Discussion with medical doctor | 143 (61.9) | 5.9 (5.62-6.10) | 155 (59.2) | 5.7 (5.43-5.91) |
Discussion with counselor or therapist | 141 (61.0) | 5.7 (5.44-6.00) | 194 (74.1) | 6.2 (6.01-6.46)a |
Video on the Web | 69 (29.9) | 4.0 (3.67-4.32) | 81 (30.9) | 4.2 (3.93-4.49) |
Recommended website accessed from home | 116 (50.2) | 5.0 (4.70-5.35) | 149 (56.9) | 5.6 (5.37-5.85)a |
aWeb sample and Clinic sample CIs do not overlap.
bEach source was rated on a 9-point rating scale with the anchors 0-2 (not preferred), 3-5 (moderately preferred), and 6-8 (very preferred).
In considering various forms of assistance for depression, many approaches to treatment were seen as likely to be very helpful by clinic respondents including in-person meetings with a counselor (68.8%, 159/231), exercise (66.2%, 153/231), and medication recommended by a psychiatrist (51.0%, 118/231;
How helpful would the following types of assistance be if you were having a problem with depression?
Type of assistance | Clinic sample |
Web sample |
||
Very helpful |
Mean rating |
Very helpful |
Mean rating |
|
Recommended self-help book | 72 (31.2) | 4.3 (3.98-4.57) | 113 (43.1) | 4.9 (4.65-5.20)a |
Recommended self-help website | 81 (35.1) | 4.5 (4.17-4.76) | 109 (41.6) | 5.1 (4.87-5.39)a |
Telephone meetings with a counselor | 86 (37.2) | 4.4 (4.07-4.67) | 131 (50.0) | 5.0 (4.72-5.29)a |
In person meetings with a counselor | 159 (68.8) | 6.1 (5.81-6.36) | 223 (85.1) | 6.9 (6.72-7.13)a |
Educational meeting (about 2 h with 20-30 people) | 65 (28.1) | 4.0 (3.62-4.29) | 94 (40.5) | 4.2 (3.90-4.54) |
Educational workshop (about 6 h with 20-30 people) | 55 (23.8) | 3.6 (3.25-3.90) | 102 (38.9) | 4.1 (3.81-4.47) |
Web-based discussion group led by professional | 42 (18.2) | 3.2 (2.85-3.47) | 63 (24.1) | 3.7 (3.42-3.99) |
Web-based discussion group led by person who has coped with depression | 55 (23.8) | 3.5 (3.18-3.82) | 79 (30.2) | 3.8 (3.51-4.11) |
Medication recommended by your family doctor | 109 (47.2) | 4.9 (4.54-5.15) | 147 (56.1) | 5.4 (5.15-5.71)a,b |
Medication recommended by a specialist in psychiatry | 118 (51.1) | 5.0 (4.72-5.34) | 170 (64.9) | 5.9 (5.57-6.14)a |
Taking herbal medication | 72 (31.2) | 3.9 (3.55-4.21) | -c | - |
Doing exercise | 153 (66.2) | 6.0 (5.69-6.22) | - | - |
Doing meditation | 109 (47.2) | 4.9 (4.55-5.19) | - | - |
Having bright light therapy | 62 (26.8) | 3.7 (3.37-4.04) | - | - |
aWeb sample and Clinic sample CIs do not overlap.
bUpon examination of the CIs with 3 decimal places, the CIs of the two samples do not overlap.
c“-” indicated items were in Clinic but not Web survey.
dEach source was rated on a 9-point rating scale with the anchors 0-2 (
We evaluated the impact of the introduction of an honorarium to increase recruitment for the Web sample by comparing the subsamples before and after the introduction of the honorarium. The samples that received and did not receive an honorarium were very similar in demographic characteristics (see
Predictors of composite information topic score for topics given a very important rating for the Clinic sample.
Predictor | SE |
Betac | |||
Gender (0=female, 1=male) | −1.94 | .72 | −.19 | .007 | −.19 |
Ethnicity (0=nonwhite, 1=white) | 1.85 | .76 | .17 | .02 | .17 |
Marital status (0=not married, 1=married) | .47 | .76 | .05 | .54 | .04 |
Age | .004 | .03 | .01 | .88 | .01 |
Education sum | −.02 | .09 | −.02 | .83 | −.02 |
Distress score | −.11 | .09 | −.10 | .21 | −.09 |
Therapy received or needede | 2.07 | .92 | .21 | .03 | .16 |
Medication received or needed | −2.78 | .98 | −.25 | .005 | −.20 |
a
bSE
cBeta: standardized coefficients (weights).
d
eTherapy received or needed includes individuals who indicated that they had previously received counseling or therapy for depression in the past or there was a time that they would have benefited from counseling or therapy but did not receive it.
fMedication received or needed includes individuals who indicated that they had previously received medication for depression in the past or there was a time that they would have benefited from medication but did not receive it.
gThis includes the Clinic sample (N=231) data only. Information importance composite score was calculated by summing the topics that respondents provided a rating of 6-8 (very important). The range of scores on this variable is from 0 to 20.
In considering how typical respondents in the Clinic and Web surveys were of people living in the region, we compared characteristics of survey respondents with people living in the city of Winnipeg (population of about 700,000) and to those living in the province (population of about 1.3 million). Most of the Clinic participants would live in Winnipeg, whereas persons visiting the websites could have come from anywhere in the province. The Clinic sample is primarily from white (71.0%) and Aboriginal or First Nations (16.5%) cultural groups. Manitoba has an Aboriginal population of 14% [
The Clinic sample reported less current distress and had less experience with previous treatments for depression than the Web sample. This is understandable because the Clinic sample was recruited from people seeking general medical assessment and treatment, whereas those visiting the self-help association websites were more likely focused on getting information on depression and anxiety. Furthermore, persons who have sought help in the past are more likely to seek help in the future [
The Clinic sample appears to produce more cultural diversity that is a closer match to the population. Both surveys had an underrepresentation of males relative to the population. In the case of the Web survey, this was improved somewhat by the use of an honorarium to encourage participation.
We found that in both Clinic and Web samples, people are interested in information on a wide range of topics. Participants were especially interested in psychological treatments, physical exercise, and medication treatments. Characteristics of treatments such as the effectiveness of treatments, their goals, duration, side effects, and what happens when treatment stops were also considered to be important. This finding that people are interested in information on many topics is consistent with previous research on mental health information needs and preferences [
One can imagine how difficult it would be to review this amount of information in the typical primary care visit of 10-15 min and even in a specialist visit of 20-50 min. More importantly from the patient’s perspective it would also be very challenging to remember this amount of information if it were presented orally, especially when struggling with depression. In these situations, it is often helpful for the clinician to provide information in some form that can be reviewed over a longer time period by the patient and concerned family and friends. This type of written information is commonly provided in the form of patient-oriented brochures [
Other researchers [
A specific example of challenges in accessing evidence to answer an important question is the topic of what happens when psychological or medication treatment stops. Many medication treatment trials are of relatively short duration (eg, 8-12 weeks), include no follow-up period, and report no data on what happens after medication is discontinued. Psychological treatment trials often report follow-up after treatment is terminated but the time period is often limited (6-12 months; [
Ratings of importance of most topics were both greater overall in the Web sample compared with the Clinic sample. This is not surprising as those in the Web survey were seeking information, whereas those attending the clinic would have been seeking care for a wide range of health problems. The Web sample also reported higher levels of psychological distress, which could be associated with a higher interest in depression information.
In considering people to speak to for advice, respondents reported a broad range of people that were seen as important sources of advice. Counselors and family doctors were seen as important sources of advice along with romantic partners and friends. In the Web group, a counselor or therapist was rated particularly highly as a source of advice. This may have been related to the high amount of experience in this group with counseling for depression.
Participants in both samples indicated preferences for receiving information in a variety of ways including discussion with a counselor or therapist, written form (such as a brochure), and discussion with a medical doctor. Despite being Web users, receiving information in written form or brochure was highly rated in the respondents to the Web survey. These findings demonstrate the importance of having information available to be delivered via different formats or methods, which is consistent with previous research in this area [
Overall, the pattern of responses on the helpfulness of assistance types between the Clinic and Web samples was quite similar. However, the Web sample provided higher ratings of helpfulness of most assistance types. The Web sample was more distressed and had more treatment experience so they may have seen treatment options as more helpful for this reason. In both samples, counseling or therapy was rated highest among the different forms of assistance, which is not surprising given the literature on preference for psychological treatments [
When we considered characteristics of respondents related to the number of information topics considered to be very important, we found that females, whites, and those who had received or felt they would have benefited from therapy in the past saw more topics as very important. Those who had received or thought that they would have benefited in the past from medication treatment saw fewer topics as important. The magnitude of these differences was modest however. This finding was similar to findings by Cunningham and colleagues [
This study has a few main limitations. One major limitation is the differences in the characteristics of the samples. Therefore, some of the differences found in the results may have been a consequence of the different make-up of the two samples. Recruiting more similar samples would have allowed for more control of potential sample effects. A second limitation is that the response rate for the Web survey is unknown. Due to a link to the survey being available on a number of websites, we do not know who might have reviewed the invitation to participate in the survey, and not clicked on the link to start completing the survey. In comparison, 71% of the people approached for the paper-based survey agreed to participate. Another limitation is that most of the respondents to the Web-based survey were female (84%). This limits the generalizability of those findings. However, we compared the results reported by males and females within the Clinic survey (57% female) and the response patterns were very similar (data not shown). The final limitation is related to the Clinic survey. Participants were recruited from primary health care settings and their opinions may not be generalizable to the opinions of the general public.
This is one of few studies that addresses the information needs and preferences concerning treatment options for depression. The findings may help practitioners in making resources available that assist members of the public in decision making. Each survey format has its advantages. The Clinic survey includes a more broad and representative sample. The Web survey through self-help association websites captures individuals who are clearly seeking information. Web surveys are considerably lower in cost than a survey administered by a research assistant inviting participation by visitors to a primary care medical clinic. The use of an honorarium to encourage participation increases response rate and likely representativeness of the sample (compared with the population at large), although it also increases the cost. The similarities in the broad findings between the Clinic and the Web surveys is reassuring and suggests that helpful opinions may be gathered by each method as long as the limitations of the sampling approach are recognized.
Website survey notice.
Complete version of survey.
Administrative aspects of treatment.
Sociodemographic characteristics of respondents who received or did not receive honorarium.
Treatment options: what information would be important to you if you were considering help? Responses with or without honorarium.
How likely would you be to talk to one of the following people for advice if you were having a serious problem with depression? Responses with and without honorarium.
Preferred method of receiving information about services. Responses with and without honorarium.
How helpful would the following types of assistance be if you were having a problem with depression? Responses with and without honorarium.
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
Research Ethics Board
standard deviation
Funding for this study was provided by a Knowledge Translation Team Grant from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the Mental Health Commission of Canada (TMF 88666). The authors thank the staff at the St Boniface and St James Medical Clinics and the Family Medical Centre (St Boniface) for allowing us to recruit participants in their settings.
Members of The Mobilizing Mind Research Group include the following (in alphabetical order): Young adult partners: Chris Amini, Amanda Aziz, Meagan DeJong, Pauline Fogarty, Mark Leonhart, Alicia Raimundo, Kristin Reynolds, Allan Sielski, Tarannum Syed, and Alexandria Tulloch; community partners: Maria Luisa Contursi and Christine Garinger from mindyourmind (mindyourmind.ca); research partners: Lynne Angus, Chuck Cunningham, John D. Eastwood, Jack Ferrari, Patricia Furer, Madalyn Marcus, Jennifer McPhee, David Phipps, Linda Rose-Krasnor, Kim Ryan-Nicholls, Richard Swinson, John Walker, and Henny Westra; and research associates Jennifer Volk and Brad Zacharias.
MTB participated in study design, data analysis, data interpretation, and prepared the manuscript. JRW participated in survey design, data interpretation, and manuscript preparation. KAS participated in survey design and manuscript preparation. AK participated in survey design and manuscript preparation. BEB participated in data collection. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
None declared.