Mental Health and Wellness of Service Providers Working with People Experiencing Homelessness in Canada: A National Survey from the Second Wave of the COVID-19 Pandemic
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
OBJECTIVE: This study examined the scope of common mental health problems and perceived impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic among direct service providers working with people experiencing homelessness in Canada. METHOD: This cross-sectional study used an online survey that was disseminated to homeless service, supportive housing, and harm reduction organizations and networks. Data were collected on depression, anxiety, stress, post-traumatic stress, compassion satisfaction and fatigue, and substance use problems as well as pandemic-related changes in mental health and wellness. A total of 701 service providers completed the survey and were included in data analysis. Descriptive statistics were used to examine the primary research questions, with hierarchical multiple regression models also being fit to explore mental health and wellness differences by occupational service setting. RESULTS: Most direct service providers (79.5%) working with people experiencing homelessness reported a decline in their mental health during the pandemic. There were high rates of common mental health problems within the sample that are largely consistent with those found among health-care workers during the pandemic. Occupational service settings were not associated with the severity of mental health problems, indicating pervasive issues across the workforce, though providers who were younger and spent more time in direct service roles were at greater risk. CONCLUSIONS: The common mental health problems and negative impacts of the pandemic among service providers working with people experiencing homelessness highlight a highly vulnerable workforce that could benefit from improved access to supports. Given the similarities between our findings and other studies examining essential workforces, it is recommended that initiatives that provide accessible mental health care to the health-care workforce during the pandemic be expanded to include homeless and social service providers.
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 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 | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| 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 | 0,001 |
| 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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, 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 ».