Modèle de l’engagement et de l’abandon de traitement de l’adolescent avec trouble de personnalité limite
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Objectives More than half of suicidal adolescents, a large proportion of which manifest borderline personality disorder (BPD), drop out from treatment. The consequences of their premature termination are cause for concern given the recurrence of their suicidal attempts and that they present elevated risk for major mental disorders during adulthood. The study sought to gain a broader appreciation of processes involved in the treatment dropout among adolescents with BPD.Method A constructivist grounded theory was chosen using a multiple-case research design. Twelve cases were examined. Three groups of informants were recruited (adolescents, parents, and therapists involved in the treatment) and 34 interviews were conducted to document the cases. Theoretical sampling and the different stages of analysis specific to grounded theory were performed according to the iterative process of constant comparative analysis.Results Various dropout vulnerabilities specific to adolescents with BPD and their parents, including psychological characteristics, help-seeking context and perception of mental illness and mental healthcare were identified. Care-setting response including management of accessibility problems, adaptation of services to needs of adolescents with BPD, preparation for treatment, and consideration for the health professional's disposition to treat were also found to be determinant to their engagement to treatment. The processes of disengagement from treatment have also been specified. Negative perceptions regarding treatment, clinicians and receiving treatment have been shown to generate emotional activation. The aforementioned lead to counterproductive attitudes that evolve into outright disengagement behaviours. In this context, responses from the care-setting, such as an insufficient regulation of the engagement, therapeutic faux pas and paradoxical demands, precipitate premature treatment termination. Finally, the processes involved in the abandonment of treatment were formalized in the Model of engagement and treatment dropout for adolescent with BPD. This theoretical model highlights two key milestones that may lead to treatment completion or to dropout during care. It illustrates that distinct processes characterize the premature and late dropouts of adolescents with BPD. The early terminations result from the failure of the care-setting to take advantage of the impetus for help seeking to engage the adolescent and the parent at that first critical moment in the care trajectory. On the other hand, the late dropouts translate failures of the care-setting to adopt corrective measures to maintain the patient in treatment at a second critical moment indicated by their disengagement.Conclusion The termination rate of those adolescent treatments could be diminished by a system of care-setting that recognizes the inherent difficulties related to the treatment of those specific patients, is proactive to solve problems of disengagement, integrates support systems for clinicians and promotes a reflexive practice.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,006 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Communication savante | 0,005 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,008 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».