Treatment Delivery Preferences Associated With Type of Mental Disorder and Perceived Treatment Barriers Among Mexican University Students

PURPOSE: Although Internet-based electronic health (eHealth) interventions could potentially reduce mental health disparities, especially in college students in under-resourced countries, little is known about the relative acceptability of eHealth versus in-person treatment modalities and the treatment barriers associated with a preference for one type over the other. METHODS: Participants were from the 2018-2019 cohort of the University Project for Healthy Students (PUERTAS), a Web-based survey of incoming first-year students in Mexico and part of the World Mental Health International College Student Survey initiative. A total of 7,849 first-year students, 54.73% female, from five Mexican universities participated. We estimated correlates of preference for eHealth delivery over in-person modalities with a multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: Thirty-eight percent of students prefer in-person services, 36% showed no preference for in-person over eHealth, 19% prefer not to use services of any kind, and 7% preferred eHealth over in-person treatment delivery. Being embarrassed, worried about harm to one's academic career, wanting to handle problems on one's own, beliefs about treatment efficacy, having depression, and having attention-deficient hyperactivity disorder were associated with a clear preference for eHealth delivery methods with odds ratios ranging from 1.47 to 2.59. CONCLUSIONS: Although more students preferred in-person services over eHealth, those reporting attitudinal barriers (i.e., embarrassment, stigma, wanting to handle problems on one's own, and beliefs about treatment efficacy) and with depression or attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder had a greater preference for eHealth interventions suggesting these are students to whom eHealth interventions could be targeted to alleviate symptoms and/or as a bridge to future in-person treatment.

Publication year:2020

BOF-keylabel:yes

IOF-keylabel:yes

BOF-publication weight:6

CSS-citation score:2

Authors:International

Authors from:Higher Education

Accessibility:Closed