Acculturation measures intend to capture the psychological, behavioral, and attitudinal changes that occur when individuals and groups from different cultures come into continuous contact with each other. This article examines the most prominent theoretical models and assumptions that drive acculturation measures. Examples of Hispanic acculturation measures are used to illustrate how these theoretical foundations are applied in empirical measures. Particular emphasis is given to discussing the strengths and limitations of two bidimensional measures, the Bidimensional Acculturation Scale for Hispanics (BAS) and the Acculturation Rating Scale for Mexican Americans-Revised (ARSMA-II). Recommendations for improving these measures are presented. Moving beyond proxy measures, improving the operationalization of acculturation indicators, and incorporating theoretical models, as well as contextual variables, are the key recommendations presented for improving measures of acculturation.

Public stigma is a pervasive barrier that prevents many individuals in the U.S. from engaging in mental health care. This systematic literature review aims to: (1) evaluate methods used to study the public’s stigma toward mental disorders, (2) summarize stigma findings focused on the public’s stigmatizing beliefs and actions and attitudes toward mental health treatment for children and adults with mental illness, and (3) draw recommendations for reducing stigma towards individuals with mental disorders and advance research in this area. Public stigma of mental illness in the U.S. was widespread. Findings can inform interventions to reduce the public’s stigma of mental illness.

Enhancing the functioning of parents, teachers, juvenile justice authorities, and other health and mental heal professionals who direct children and adolescents to services is a major mental health services concern. The Gateway Provider Model is an elaborated testable subset of the Network-Episode Model (NEM; B. A. Pescosolido & C. A. Boyer, 1999) that synthesizes it with Decision (D. H. Gustafson, et al., 1999) and organizational theory (C. Glisson, 2002; C. Glisson & L. James, 1992, 2002). The Gateway Provider Model focuses on central influences that affect youth's access to treatment, i.e., the individual who first identifies a problem and sends a youth to treatment (the "gateway provider"); and the need those individuals have for information on youth problems and relevant potential resources. Preliminary studies by the authors and other applicable studies (D. Carise & O. Gurel, 2003) show that providers' perception of need, and their knowledge of resources, and their environment are related to the decision to offer or refer to services, supporting key aspects of the Model.

Rates of suicide attempts among adolescent Latinas have been reported to be higher than for their non-Hispanic counterparts. Yet researchers know very little about the attempts, their antecedents, and why the girls attempt suicide. Latina girls have been included in research on suicidal adolescents and typically show higher rates of attempts relative to similar psychopathology when compared with other young women. A few small studies have focused on Latinas, but none have explored why suicide attempt rates are higher. The authors constructed a conceptual model to provide a formulation of this phenomenon on the basis of a review of the literature on suicide attempts among Latinas and their clinical experience. This model can serve as a framework to guide research on the unique sociocultural processes present in Latina adolescent suicide attempts and may also benefit the work of clinicians.

Background: Research has generated valuable knowledge in identifying, understanding, and intervening to address inequities in the delivery of healthcare, yet these inequities persist. The best available interventions, programs and policies designed to address inequities in healthcare are not being adopted in routine practice settings. Implementation science can help address this gap by studying the factors, processes, and strategies at multiple levels of a system of care that influence the uptake, use, and the sustainability of these programs for vulnerable populations. We propose that an equity lens can help integrate the fields of implementation science and research that focuses on inequities in healthcare delivery. Main text: Using Proctor et al.' (12) framework as a case study, we reframed five elements of implementation science to study inequities in healthcare. These elements include: 1) focus on reach from the very beginning; 2) design and select interventions for vulnerable populations and low-resource communities with implementation in mind; 3) implement what works and develop implementation strategies that can help reduce inequities in care; 4) develop the science of adaptations; and 5) use an equity lens for implementation outcomes. Conclusions: The goal of this paper is to continue the dialogue on how to critically infuse an equity approach in implementation studies to proactively address healthcare inequities in historically underserved populations. Our examples provide ways to operationalize how we can blend implementation science and healthcare inequities research.

BackgroundRacial and ethnic disparities in the United States exist along the entire continuum of mental health care, from access and use of services to the quality and outcomes of care. Efforts to address these inequities in mental health care have focused on adapting evidence-based treatments to clients’ diverse cultural backgrounds. Yet, like many evidence-based treatments, culturally adapted interventions remain largely unused in usual care settings. We propose that a viable avenue to address this critical question is to create a dialogue between the fields of implementation science and cultural adaptation. In this paper, we discuss how integrating these two fields can make significant contributions to reducing racial and ethnic disparities in mental health care.DiscussionThe use of cultural adaptation models in implementation science can deepen the explicit attention to culture, particularly at the client and provider levels, in implementation studies making evidence-based treatments more responsive to the needs and preferences of diverse populations. The integration of both fields can help clarify and specify what to adapt in order to achieve optimal balance between adaptation and fidelity, and address important implementation outcomes (e.g., acceptability, appropriateness). A dialogue between both fields can help clarify the knowledge, skills and roles of who should facilitate the process of implementation, particularly when cultural adaptations are needed. The ecological perspective of implementation science provides an expanded lens to examine how contextual factors impact how treatments (adapted or not) are ultimately used and sustained in usual care settings. Integrating both fields can also help specify when in the implementation process adaptations may be considered in order to enhance the adoption and sustainability of evidence-based treatments.SummaryImplementation science and cultural adaptation bring valuable insights and methods to how and to what extent treatments and/or context should be customized to enhance the implementation of evidence-based treatments across settings and populations. Developing a two-way street between these two fields can provide a better avenue for moving the best available treatments into practice and for helping to reduce racial and ethnic disparities in mental health care.

Since the early 1980s, epidemiological studies using state-of-the-art methodologies have documented the unmet mental health needs of Latinos adults in the U.S. and Puerto Rico. This paper reviews 16 articles based on seven epidemiological studies, examines studies methodologies, and summarizes findings about how Latino adults access mental health services. Studies consistently report that, compared to non-Latino Whites, Latinos underutilize mental health services, are less likely to receive guideline congruent care, and rely more often on primary care for services. Structural, economic, psychiatric, and cultural factors influence Latinos' service access. In spite of the valuable information these studies provide, methodological limitations (e.g., reliance on cross-sectional designs, scarcity of mixed Latino group samples) constrict knowledge about Latinos access to mental health services. Areas for future research and development needed to improve Latinos' access and quality of mental health care are discussed.

This study aimed to describe Hispanic immigrants' perceptions of depression and attitudes toward treatments and to examine how demographics, acculturation, clinical factors, and past service use were associated with their perceptions and attitudes. A convenience sample of 95 Hispanic immigrant patients was presented a vignette depicting an individual with major depression. Structured interviews that included standardized instruments and open-ended questions were used to query patients about their views of depression and its treatments. Findings showed that Hispanic immigrants perceived depression as a serious condition caused by interpersonal and social factors. Consistent with existing literature, most patients endorsed positive attitudes toward depression treatments yet reported apprehensions toward antidepressants. Demographic factors, acculturation, depressive symptoms, and past mental health service use were related to patients' views of depression and attitudes toward care. This study emphasizes the need to incorporate Hispanic immigrants' perceptions and attitudes into depression treatments.