Skip to main content

Table 2 Comparisons of overall responsibility assigned to stakeholder pairs for overall support

From: Whose responsibility? Part 2 of 2: views of patients, families, and clinicians about responsibilities for addressing the needs of persons with mental health problems in Chennai, India and Montreal, Canada

 

Patients

Families

Clinicians

Statistics

Montreal

N = 85

M (SD)

Chennai

N = 164

M (SD)

Montreal

N = 63

M (SD)

Chennai

N = 164

M (SD)

Montreal

N = 29

M (SD)

Chennai

N = 21

M (SD)

F(df), p, ηp2

Government vs

Persons with mental health problems

3.98 (2.21)

4.33 (1.88)

2.73 (1.52)

3.55 (1.57)

3.55 (1.61)

3.95 (1.23)

Site effect

F = 16.96 (1,519), < 0.001;

ηp2 = 0.032

Rater effect a

F = 11.41 (2,519), < 0.001;

ηp2 = 0.042

Interaction effect

F = 0.23 (2,519), 0.797;

ηp2 = 0.001

Government vs

Families

4.36 (2.21)

5.24 (2.17)

3.43 (1.63)

4.81 (1.82)

3.78 (1.54)

4.61 (0.89)

Site effect

F = 41.43 (1,519), < 0.001;

ηp2 = 0.074

Rater effect b

F = 3.06 (2,519), 0.048;

ηp2 = 0.012

Interaction effect

F = 0.37 (2,519), 0.689;

ηp2 = 0.001

Families vs

Persons with mental health problems

5.17 (1.76)

4.31 (1.84)

4.02 (1.36)

3.65 (1.53)

4.97 (1.18)

4.33 (0.89)

Site effect

F = 10.93 (1,521), < 0.001;

ηp2 = 0.021

Rater effect c

F = 16.51 (2,521), < 0.001;

ηp2 = 0.060

Interaction effect

F = 1.16 (2,521), 0.315;

ηp2 = 0.004

  1. Significant differences, p < 0.05, are bold. Vs. versus
  2. Post-hoc pairwise comparisons with Bonferroni adjustment: a Family raters attributed significantly more responsibility to government than patient raters, p < 0.001; b Family raters attributed more responsibility to government than patient raters, but this did not reach statistical significance, p = 0.074; c Family raters attributed significantly more responsibility to families than both patient raters, p < 0.001 and clinician raters, p = 0.006