Aims. There is a need of more quantitative standardised data to compare local Mental Health Systems (MHSs) across international jurisdictions. Problems related to terminological variability and commensurability in the evaluation of services hamper like-with-like comparisons and hinder the development of work in this area. This study was aimed to provide standard assessment and comparison of MHS in selected local areas in Europe, contributing to a better understanding of MHS and related allocation of resources at local level and to lessen the scarcity in standard service comparison in Europe. This study is part of the Seventh Framework programme REFINEMENT (Research on Financing Systems' Effect on the Quality of Mental Health Care in Europe) project.Methods. A total of eight study areas from European countries with different systems of care (Austria, England, Finland, France, Italy, Norway, Romania, Spain) were analysed using a standard open-access classification system (Description and Evaluation of Services for Long Term Care in Europe, DESDE-LTC). All publicly funded services universally accessible to adults (≥18 years) with a psychiatric disorder were coded. Care availability, diversity and capacity were compared across these eight local MHS.Results. The comparison of MHS revealed more community-oriented delivery systems in the areas of England (Hampshire) and Southern European countries (Verona -Italy and Girona -Spain). Community-oriented systems with a higher proportion of hospital care were identified in Austria (Industrieviertel) and Scandinavian countries (Sør-Trøndelag in Norway and Helsinki-Uusimaa in Finland), while Loiret (France) was considered as a predominantly hospital-based system. The MHS in Suceava (Romania) was still in transition to community care.Conclusions. There is a significant variation in care availability and capacity across MHS of local areas in Europe. This information is relevant for understanding the process of implementation of community-oriented mental health care in local areas. Standard comparison of care provision in local areas is important for context analysis and policy planning.

Local Indicators of Spatial Aggregation (LISA) can be used as objectives in a multicriteria framework when highly autocorrelated areas (hot-spots) must be identified and geographically located in complex areas. To do so, a Multi-Objective Evolutionary Algorithm (MOEA) based on SPEA2 (Strength Pareto Evolutionary Algorithm v.2) has been designed to evaluate three different fitness functions (fine-grained strength, the weighted sum of objectives and fuzzy evaluation of weighted objectives) and three LISA methods. MOEA makes it possible to achieve a compromise between spatial econometric methods as it highlights areas where a specific phenomenon shows significantly high autocorrelation. The spatial distribution of financially compromised olive-tree farms in Andalusia (Spain) was selected for analysis and two fuzzy hot-spots were statistically identified and spatially located. Hot-spots can be considered to be spatial fuzzy sets where the spatial units have a membership degree that can also be calculated.

Studies show that the association between socio-economic status (SES) and self-rated health (SRH) varies in different countries, however there are not many country-comparisons that examine this relationship over time. The objective of the present study is to determine the effect of three SES measures on SRH in 29 countries according to findings in European Social Surveys (2002–2008), in order to study how socio-economic inequalities can vary our subjective state of health. In line with previous studies, income inequalities seem to be greater not only in Anglo-Saxon and Scandinavian countries, but especially in Eastern European countries. The impact of education is greater in Southern countries, and this effect is similar in Eastern and Scandinavian countries, although occupational status does not produce significant differences in southern countries. This study shows the general relevance of socio-educational factors on SRH. Individual economic conditions are obviously a basic factor contributing to a good state of health, but education could be even more relevant to preserve it. In this sense, policies should not only aim at reducing income inequalities, but should also further the education of people who are in risk of social exclusion.

BackgroundDecision support in health systems is a highly difficult task, due to the inherent complexity of the process and structures involved.MethodThis paper introduces a new hybrid methodology Expert-based Cooperative Analysis (EbCA), which incorporates explicit prior expert knowledge in data analysis methods, and elicits implicit or tacit expert knowledge (IK) to improve decision support in healthcare systems. EbCA has been applied to two different case studies, showing its usability and versatility: 1) Bench-marking of small mental health areas based on technical efficiency estimated by EbCA-Data Envelopment Analysis (EbCA-DEA), and 2) Case-mix of schizophrenia based on functional dependency using Clustering Based on Rules (ClBR). In both cases comparisons towards classical procedures using qualitative explicit prior knowledge were made. Bayesian predictive validity measures were used for comparison with expert panels results. Overall agreement was tested by Intraclass Correlation Coefficient in case "1" and kappa in both cases.ResultsEbCA is a new methodology composed by 6 steps:. 1) Data collection and data preparation; 2) acquisition of "Prior Expert Knowledge" (PEK) and design of the "Prior Knowledge Base" (PKB); 3) PKB-guided analysis; 4) support-interpretation tools to evaluate results and detect inconsistencies (here Implicit Knowledg -IK- might be elicited); 5) incorporation of elicited IK in PKB and repeat till a satisfactory solution; 6) post-processing results for decision support. EbCA has been useful for incorporating PEK in two different analysis methods (DEA and Clustering), applied respectively to assess technical efficiency of small mental health areas and for case-mix of schizophrenia based on functional dependency. Differences in results obtained with classical approaches were mainly related to the IK which could be elicited by using EbCA and had major implications for the decision making in both cases.DiscussionThis paper presents EbCA and shows the convenience of completing classical data analysis with PEK as a mean to extract relevant knowledge in complex health domains. One of the major benefits of EbCA is iterative elicitation of IK.. Both explicit and tacit or implicit expert knowledge are critical to guide the scientific analysis of very complex decisional problems as those found in health system research.

Mental health services (MHS) have gone through vast changes during the last decades, shifting from hospital to community-based care. Developing the optimal balance and use of resources requires standard comparisons of mental health care systems across countries. This study aimed to compare the structure, personnel resource allocation, and the productivity of the MHS in two benchmark health districts in a Nordic welfare state and a southern European, family-centered country. The study is part of the REFINEMENT (Research on Financing Systems’ Effect on the Quality of Mental Health Care) project. The study areas were the Helsinki and Uusimaa region in Finland and the Girona region in Spain. The MHS were mapped by using the DESDE-LTC (Description and Evaluation of Services and Directories for Long Term Care) tool. There were 6.7 times more personnel resources in the MHS in Helsinki and Uusimaa than in Girona. The resource allocation was more residential-service-oriented in Helsinki and Uusimaa. The difference in mental health personnel resources is not explained by the respective differences in the need for MHS among the population. It is important to make a standard comparison of the MHS for supporting policymaking and to ensure equal access to care across European countries.

Introduction: Mental health care is a critical area to better understand integrated care and to pilot the different components of the integrated care model. However, there is an urgent need for better tools to compare and understand the context of integrated mental health care in Europe.

No abstract

Policy makers can use Atlases to detect gaps and inequities in the provision of care for people with mental health needs.