Show simple item record

FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorBobo, Firew Tekle
dc.contributor.authorHollier, Joel
dc.contributor.authorChang, Kuo-Yi Jade
dc.contributor.authorDisney, George
dc.contributor.authorMullin, Bernie
dc.contributor.authorSmith-Merry, Jennifer
dc.date.accessioned2026-07-13T03:59:45Z
dc.date.available2026-07-13T03:59:45Z
dc.date.issued2026en_AU
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2123/35565
dc.description.abstractObjective: We aimed to assess the alignment in defining and measuring psychosocial disability and/or mental health challenges across major Australian national mental health data sources. Methods: We reviewed the definition and measurement of psychosocial disability and mental health challenges in two stages. First, we examined the data items across five national data sources: the Survey of Disability, Ageing and Carers (SDAC), the National Health Survey (NHS), the National Study of Mental Health and Wellbeing (NSMHW), the Census and the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) administrative data. In the second stage, we analysed the prevalence of psychosocial disability and mental health challenges across the datasets. Results: The definition and measurement approaches for psychosocial disability and mental health challenges vary across data sources, reflecting differences in the conditions included and the purpose for which data were collected. Psychosocial disability is inconsistently defined: broad population surveys (SDAC, NHS) include neurodevelopmental and neurodegenerative conditions, whereas the NDIS captures only severe mental illnesses with substantial functional impairment. Prevalence across Australia varied widely from 42.9% for lifetime mental disorders (NSMHW) and 26.1% for long-term conditions (NHS), down to 6% when strictly defining psychosocial disability (SDAC). Conclusions: There are variations in definitions and measurement across major Australian mental health data sources with respect to conditions captured in the datasets and the definitions used. Researchers and policymakers should therefore critically appraise – and where possible adjust for – these variations when using these data to inform strategic decisions and resource allocation.en_AU
dc.language.isoenen_AU
dc.publisherSageen_AU
dc.relation.ispartofAustralian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatryen_AU
dc.rightsCreative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0en_AU
dc.subjectmental healthen_AU
dc.subjectpsychosocial disabilityen_AU
dc.subjectmeasurementen_AU
dc.subjectmental health conditionsen_AU
dc.subjectmental health challengesen_AU
dc.subjectadministrative dataen_AU
dc.subjectnational surveysen_AU
dc.titleDefining and measuring psychosocial disability in Australia: Assessment of national surveys and administrative datasetsen_AU
dc.typeArticleen_AU
dc.identifier.doi10.1177/00048674261450886
dc.type.pubtypePublisher's versionen_AU
dc.relation.arcIL230100154
usyd.facultySeS faculties schools::Faculty of Medicine and Health::Centre for Disability Research and Policyen_AU
workflow.metadata.onlyNoen_AU


Show simple item record

Associated file/s

Associated collections

Show simple item record

There are no previous versions of the item available.