Needs and Experiences of Users of Digital Navigation Tools for Mental Health Treatment and Supportive Services: Survey Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Despite a recent proliferation in web-based and digital resources that are designed to assist users in finding appropriate mental health treatment and supportive services, it can be overwhelming, confusing, and difficult for an individual or family member to access and use an appropriate navigation tool. As digital resources are increasingly sought after, there is an urgent need for a clearer understanding of digital navigation tools in order to help link individuals with the tool that is best suited to their needs. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine the needs of individuals seeking mental health treatment and supportive services and to quantify their experiences and satisfaction with available digital navigation tools. METHODS: A survey was offered via an email newsletter and social media posting throughout the extended membership of the National Alliance on Mental Illness, which includes both individuals with a mental health condition and their family members and support networks. A 13-item anonymous survey, which consisted of multiple-choice and open response options, was developed to measure participants' past use of and experiences with web-based, mobile, and phone-based navigation tools. The survey was available from April 9 through May 21, 2020. RESULTS: A total of 478 respondents completed the survey; the majority of respondents were female (397/478, 83.1%) and aged ≥35 years (411/478, 86%). Younger respondents were more likely to report seeking mental health services for themselves, while older respondents were more likely to be searching for such services on behalf of a family member. The majority of respondents seeking such services on behalf of a family member (113/194, 58.2%) required a combination of mental health treatment and supportive services. Furthermore, two-thirds of respondents (322/478, 67.4%) used a navigation tool to find treatment or services. The majority of respondents who provided feedback about their experiences with navigation tools (224/280, 80%) reported difficulties, with data availability and accuracy being the most commonly reported issues. CONCLUSIONS: The survey results suggest that issues with data availability and accuracy in available navigation tools remain a major barrier for locating timely and appropriate mental health treatment and supportive services within the population of individuals seeking such services. Particularly for individuals seeking care on behalf of a family member, improving the accuracy of and users' experiences with navigation tools could have a major impact on effectively connecting people to treatment and support services.
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 | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 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 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 ».