Applying the Health Belief Model to Characterize Racial/Ethnic Differences in Digital Conversations Related to Depression Pre- and Mid-COVID-19: Descriptive Analysis
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: The prevalence of depression in the United States is >3 times higher mid-COVID-19 versus prepandemic. Racial/ethnic differences in mindsets around depression and the potential impact of the COVID-19 pandemic are not well characterized. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to describe attitudes, mindsets, key drivers, and barriers related to depression pre- and mid-COVID-19 by race/ethnicity using digital conversations about depression mapped to health belief model (HBM) concepts. METHODS: Advanced search, data extraction, and artificial intelligence-powered tools were used to harvest, mine, and structure open-source digital conversations of US adults who engaged in conversations about depression pre- (February 1, 2019-February 29, 2020) and mid-COVID-19 pandemic (March 1, 2020-November 1, 2020) across the internet. Natural language processing, text analytics, and social data mining were used to categorize conversations that included a self-identifier into racial/ethnic groups. Conversations were mapped to HBM concepts (ie, perceived susceptibility, perceived severity, perceived benefits, perceived barriers, cues to action, and self-efficacy). Results are descriptive in nature. RESULTS: Of 2.9 and 1.3 million relevant digital conversations pre- and mid-COVID-19, race/ethnicity was determined among 1.8 million (62.2%) and 979,000 (75.3%) conversations, respectively. Pre-COVID-19, 1.3 million (72.1%) conversations about depression were analyzed among non-Hispanic Whites (NHW), 227,200 (12.6%) among Black Americans (BA), 189,200 (10.5%) among Hispanics, and 86,800 (4.8%) among Asian Americans (AS). Mid-COVID-19, a total of 736,100 (75.2%) conversations about depression were analyzed among NHW, 131,800 (13.5%) among BA, 78,300 (8.0%) among Hispanics, and 32,800 (3.3%) among AS. Conversations among all racial/ethnic groups had a negative tone, which increased pre- to mid-COVID-19; finding support from others was seen as a benefit among most groups. Hispanics had the highest rate of any racial/ethnic group of conversations showing an avoiding mindset toward their depression. Conversations related to external barriers to seeking treatment (eg, stigma, lack of support, and lack of resources) were generally more prevalent among Hispanics, BA, and AS than among NHW. Being able to benefit others and building a support system were key drivers to seeking help or treatment for all racial/ethnic groups. CONCLUSIONS: There were considerable racial/ethnic differences in drivers and barriers to seeking help and treatment for depression pre- and mid-COVID-19. As expected, COVID-19 has made conversations about depression more negative and with frequent discussions of barriers to seeking care. Applying concepts of the HBM to data on digital conversation about depression allowed organization of the most frequent themes by race/ethnicity. Individuals of all groups came online to discuss their depression. These data highlight opportunities for culturally competent and targeted approaches to addressing areas amenable to change that might impact the ability of people to ask for or receive mental health help, such as the constructs that comprise the HBM.
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 | 0,004 | 0,020 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 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 ».