MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3204322405 · doi:10.1177/26334895211045690

Evaluating the sector-wide implementation of virtual child and youth mental health services in response to the COVID-19 pandemic: Perspectives from service providers, agency leaders and clients

2021· article· en· W3204322405 sur OpenAlexafffundabout
Evangeline Danseco, Julia Kurzawa, Purnima Sundar, Jaime Lee Brown, Christal Huang

Notice bibliographique

RevueImplementation Research and Practice · 2021
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Établissements canadiensMental Health Research CanadaOntario Centre of Excellence for Child and Youth Mental HealthChildren's Hospital of Eastern Ontario
Organismes subventionnairesOntario Centre of Excellence for Child and Youth Mental Health
Mots-clésMental healthService providerAgency (philosophy)Focus groupService delivery frameworkHealth carePublic relationsService (business)NursingBusinessPsychologyMedicinePolitical scienceSociologyMarketingPsychiatry

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic prompted an abrupt shift in the delivery of community-based child and youth mental health services as virtual care was rapidly adopted. The objective of this study was to evaluate the sector-wide transition to virtual care across Ontario, with a focus on implementation facilitators and barriers. Methods: We used a multi-level mixed-methods design where agency leaders, service providers, and clients shared their experiences planning, implementing, and accessing virtual care. In total, 97 agency leaders, and 192 youth and family members responded to the surveys; 13 agency leaders, and 11 service providers participated in interviews or focus groups. Results: Most agencies undertook a similar journey to implement virtual care. Stakeholders described common facilitators such as staff engagement, leadership support, and training activities. Barriers included internet connection issues, lack of resources, and privacy concerns. Service providers innovated as they implemented by partnering with agencies to meet clients' needs, using multiple platforms to engage clients, and altering session duration to reduce fatigue. Clients found virtual care easy to use, felt confident using it, and intend to continue accessing virtual care. Conclusion: Implementation of virtual care during the pandemic was complex and the evaluation involved obtaining perspectives at multiple levels. This research provides a blueprint for evaluations of the implementation of virtual mental health services, particularly in a child/youth context. Virtual care is a viable way to deliver mental health services, however, equity, accessibility, and appropriateness need to be addressed to ensure services are effective for children, youth, and their families. Plain language abstract: Academic literature suggests that using technology to deliver child and youth mental health services is a promising way to enhance access to care and improve engagement for many children and youth. Despite this, the provision of virtual child and youth mental health services in Ontario prior to the COVID-19 pandemic was limited. Efforts that did exist were largely focused on providing care to those in rural and remote areas. The COVID-19 pandemic prompted a rapid shift to virtual care, as most in-person mental health services were suspended. This paper presents new insight into how virtual mental health services were quickly established and used across Ontario from the perspectives of senior leaders, service providers, and clients. Results from this evaluation showed that agencies followed similar steps to prepare to use virtual services. Staff engagement, support from leadership, and opportunities for staff training supported the implementation of virtual care while internet connections issues, lack of resources (like computers or phones), and privacy and safety concerns hindered the implementation. Most youth and family members found virtual services easy to use and intend to continue using them. Most agencies intend to continue to offer virtual services post-pandemic but noted that it was not appropriate or accessible for all clients. This study provides a foundation for additional research to examine situations and conditions that are most conducive to virtual care delivery to address child and youth mental health concerns. These results may encourage agencies to rely more confidently on virtual services as another means to meet clients' needs and preferences.

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,026
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: Qualitatif
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,230
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,456

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0260,030
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,001
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0070,004
Communication savante0,0050,003
Science ouverte0,0020,006
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,295
Tête enseignante GPT0,576
Écart entre enseignants0,281 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeQualitatif
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations28
Publié2021
Routes d'admission3
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueImplementation Research and PracticeMême sujetTelemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationTravaux en français237 207