Conversations on telemental health: listening to remote and rural First Nations communities
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
INTRODUCTION: Telemental health involves technologies such as videoconferencing to deliver mental health services and education, and to connect individuals and communities for healing and health. In remote and rural First Nations communities there are often challenges to obtaining mental healthcare in the community and to working with external mental health workers. Telemental health is a service approach and tool that can address some of these challenges and potentially support First Nations communities in their goal of improving mental health and wellbeing. Community members' perspectives on the usefulness and appropriateness of telemental health can greatly influence the level of engagement with the service. It appears that no research or literature exists on First Nations community members' perspectives on telemental health, or even on community perspectives on the broader area of technologies for mental health services. Therefore, this article explores the perspectives on telemental health of community members living in two rural and remote First Nations communities in Ontario, Canada. METHODS; This study was part of the VideoCom project, a collaborative research project exploring how remote and rural First Nations communities are using ICTs. This current exploration was conducted with the support of Keewaytinook Okimakanak (KO), our partner in Northwestern Ontario. With the full collaboration of the communities' leadership, a team involving KO staff and VideoCom researchers visited the two communities in the spring of 2010. Using a participatory research design, we interviewed 59 community members, asking about their experiences with and thoughts on using technologies and their attitudes toward telemental health, specifically. A thematic analysis of this qualitative data and a descriptive quantitative analysis of the information revealed the diversity of attitudes among community members. Finally, based on a discussion with the community telehealth staff, a 'ways forward' section was proposed as a way to begin addressing certain issues that were raised by community members. RESULTS: This article explores the continuum of community members' perspectives that range from interest and enthusiasm to hesitancy and concern. One participant reported personal experience with using telemental health and found the approach helpful in increasing her comfort in the therapeutic situation. In addition, concerns relating to appropriateness and safety were voiced. A variety of advantages (eg facilitation of disclosure, increased access to services, usefulness) and disadvantages or concerns (eg interference with capacity building, concerns about privacy) are reported and discussed. Following a coding procedure, a descriptive quantitative analysis demonstrated that 47% of the participants were categorized as having a positive response toward telemental health, 32% as having a negative response, and 21% as being neutral or undecided. CONCLUSIONS: Valuing Indigenous knowledge can help us understand community members' experiences of and concerns with telemental health and inform more successful and appropriate initiatives. With the invaluable support of the KO Telemedicine co-authors, we offer ways forward to address concerns identified by the community members. Most importantly, any ways forward for community telemental health initiatives need to be community driven and community led.
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.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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 découle