Emphasis on Mental Health Education for Aged 18 to 30 to Improve Well-being in One-month

Part B: Research Support
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Date
Part B: Research Support
PICOT Question
Mental illness is often linked to societal stressors such as hardship in life and economic constraints. However, a plethora of studies have noted the importance of education in mental illness spread. In this light, the PICOT question changed and focused on understanding the significance of mental education in suppressing the spread of mental illness. The bone of contention was whether mental health awareness could exhaustively address the problem of mental illness among patients aged 18 and 30. The clinical question of interest in the PICOT format is, does an emphasis on mental health education among adults aged between 18 and 30 compared to non-sensitization lead to improved mental well-being over a one-month timeframe?
The population of interest (P): young patients with mental illness aged between 18 and 30
Intervention (I): Mental health awareness and sensitization
Comparison (C): No mental health awareness
Outcome (O): Improve patients’ reported cases of mental illness
Time (T): One-month timeframe
Evidence-Based Practice Objectives
* To understand the literacy level of the society regarding mental health
* To understand the extent to which care providers understand the scope of mental health
* To understand the primary effects of lack of mental awareness among teenagers and youths in the society
Search Strategy
The research was actualized virtually with a search strategy informed by the following pairs of keywords:
1 Mental illness, impact, disorder management
2 The role of education, impact, mental illness management
3 Education tools, mental disorders, disorder management
4 Mental illness management, African-Americans, qualitative research
5 Mental disorder management, blacks, quantitative research
The keywords were entered into different search engines. The primary databases used included Google Scholar, science direct, Pub Med, Medline, Biomedical central, America Psychological Association (APA), and CINAHL. It was envisioned that the search would return hundreds of sources having different profiles, some of which may have minimal relevance if included in the review. In this vein, the inclusion and exclusion criteria were adopted to ensure the sources used are valid and have relevant information regarding the issue in question. The research yielded 50 sources, but this research utilized ten sources that met the inclusion and exclusion search criteria. This criterion was guided by the rules below:
* Peer-reviewed sources were considered for inclusion. Blogs, newspapers, trade publications, and magazines were excluded.
* The included articles must contain both primary and secondary research. General discussions and theoretical sources were discarded.
* The included sources must be an article with full-text information. Research abstracts and summaries were discarded from the search.
* Sources were prioritized within the past five years (2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, and 2021). Older articles were discarded because of the ever-changing medical world.
Summarization of the Sources
Viinikainen et al. (2018) investigate the role of education in alleviating mental illness among patients diagnosed with depressive symptoms. The authors sought to find answers to the issue by using Mendelian randomization. The specific aim of the Mendelian analysis was to ascertain a causal effect between higher education and better mental health. One thousand seven hundred thirty-three participants informed the study, and the data were coded and analyzed using Mendelian randomization and the Ordinary Least Square. The study affirmed that mental education is associated with lower rates of mental illness. However, the casual effect returned negative results. The study’s strengths lie within its capability of using a relatively big sample and using techniques such as OLS to analyze data. However, the study is ineffective as it has only focused on participants aged 30 and 45. This approach excludes the younger generation from 18 to 30, which this study is interested in exploring. In other words, the study needs to be conducted because the findings cannot be generalized, given each age group has its factors that lead to mental illness.
Devkota et al.’s (2021) study has been focused on understating the factors that limit effective adoption of mental health awareness in health care centeres. This aim has been championed by a cross-sectional qualitative study focused on the Nepal population. The authors noted that mental illness in society is propelled by stigma and the unavailability of mental education. In this light, the authors propose that mental awareness starts at the local community level to address the problem. The study’s strength lies in its ability to collect data from multiple sources and a vigorous data analysis. However, since the collected data was translated to English, some rich and vital information was lost, leading it to suffer subjectivity affecting the credibility of the research. Nonetheless, this research applies to future research about the issue at hand because data cannot be generalized.
Wainberg et al. (2017) sought to understand challenges and priority areas about mental health menace. The authors explored this research by using a qualitative approach. The study affirms that although common mental disorders are a burden to society, the good news is that they can be effectively addressed by applying evidence-based interventions delivered by trained care workers. The standard barrier to seeking mental health treatment is stigma. Education has been highlighted as an effective way of handling mental health problems. In particular, this can be done by teaching about stigma and ways to evade it and developing programs that decrease the incidence of mental disorders. Although the study has been specific on ways of meditating mental illness, it has failed to highlight the process of seeing the approaches executed and measuring success.
Rivera et al. (2021) aimed to develop strategies that can help reduce stigma among African-Americans in the United States. This aim has been helped through the use of a qualitative study. This study’s strength lies in utilizing evidence-based articles to develop a solution for mental illness management. On the flip side, the study has overly been focused on African-Americans; hence the results cannot be generalized to other ethnic backgrounds. This study reveals that tailoring intervention studies to this population is not helpful; instead, emphasizing partnerships ranging from schools, community organizations, and faith-based institutions are poised to reduce stigma and mediate mental illness.
The question of context has been widely debated regarding the persistence of mental illness. Jannesari et al. (2021) delve into this issue guided by a systematic qu...