IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/patien/v14y2021i6d10.1007_s40271-021-00510-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Don’t Forget the Caregivers! A Discrete Choice Experiment Examining Caregiver Views of Integrated Youth Services

Author

Listed:
  • Lisa D. Hawke

    (Centre for Addiction and Mental Health; University of Toronto)

  • Lehana Thabane

    (McMaster University)

  • Leanne Wilkins

    (Centre for Addiction and Mental Health)

  • Steve Mathias

    (Foundry)

  • Srividya Iyer

    (McGill University; ACCESS Open Minds (Youth Mental Health Services Research Network))

  • Joanna Henderson

    (Centre for Addiction and Mental Health; University of Toronto)

Abstract

Background The design and implementation of community-based integrated youth service hubs (IYSHs) is burgeoning around the world. This collaborative model of care aims to address barriers in youth service access by designing services that meet the needs of youth and caregivers. However, heterogeneity across models requires a better understanding of the preferences for key service characteristics. Method A discrete choice experiment was conducted among 274 caregivers of youth aged 14–29 years with mental health challenges. The experiment consisted of 12 attributes with four levels each, representing different service components; additional measures were collected, including demographics and burden assessments. Utility values were calculated, representing the degree of preference for a given level of an attribute. Latent class analysis was conducted to understand subgroups with different service preferences, identifying three latent classes with differing IYSH service preferences. Results The largest class (n = 173, 63.1%), entitled ‘Comprehensive, Integrative Service Access’, strongly valued practical aspects of service design, such as rapid access and support for a wide range of needs. The ‘Service Process Features’ class (n = 67, 24.5%) expressed a relative prioritization of process features of service access, while the smaller ‘Caregiver Involvement’ (n = 34, 12.4%) class most highly prioritized caregiver involvement in their youths’ services. Similar demographic characteristics and caregiver burden were found across classes, although participants in the Caregiver Involvement latent class were supporting younger youth. Discussion and Conclusions Caregivers have diverse youth service preferences and relative priorities that should be taken into account when designing services. System designers and service providers are encouraged to take caregivers’ preferences and priorities into account, alongside youth priorities, whether designing service delivery models or an individual service plan for a youth.

Suggested Citation

  • Lisa D. Hawke & Lehana Thabane & Leanne Wilkins & Steve Mathias & Srividya Iyer & Joanna Henderson, 2021. "Don’t Forget the Caregivers! A Discrete Choice Experiment Examining Caregiver Views of Integrated Youth Services," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 14(6), pages 791-802, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:patien:v:14:y:2021:i:6:d:10.1007_s40271-021-00510-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s40271-021-00510-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40271-021-00510-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40271-021-00510-6?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Reinhard, Susan C. & Gubman, Gayle D. & Horwitz, Allan V. & Minsky, Shula, 1994. "Burden assessment scale for families of the seriously mentally ill," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 261-269.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Strozier, Anne & McGrew, LaSandra & Krisman, Kerry & Smith, Aaron, 2005. "Kinship care connection: A school-based intervention for kinship caregivers and the children in their care," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 27(9), pages 1011-1029, September.
    2. Green, Sara Eleanor, 2007. ""We're tired, not sad": Benefits and burdens of mothering a child with a disability," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 150-163, January.
    3. Marta Marsilio & Floriana Fusco & Eleonora Gheduzzi & Chiara Guglielmetti, 2021. "Co-Production Performance Evaluation in Healthcare. A Systematic Review of Methods, Tools and Metrics," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(7), pages 1-28, March.
    4. Man-Man Peng & Jianli Xing & Xinfeng Tang & Qinglu Wu & Dannuo Wei & Mao-Sheng Ran, 2022. "Disease-Related Risk Factors for Caregiver Burden among Family Caregivers of Persons with Schizophrenia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(3), pages 1-16, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:patien:v:14:y:2021:i:6:d:10.1007_s40271-021-00510-6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.