Multidisciplinary mental health supervision in a rural context: An exploratory study of experiences in northern British Columbia
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The purpose of this study was to better understand how multidisciplinary mental health supervision might work in rural remote settings. There is a need for supervisory approaches that address the unique contextual challenges in rural and remote multidisciplinary service delivery, such as management approaches, isolation, and lack of support. This study focused on three areas linked to multidisciplinary mental health supervision: challenges and opportunities, role perception, and differences in approaches. This study also attempted to reconcile the core supervisory requirements with the contextual challenges. The few studies on rural remote supervision have primarily focused on general internal and external factors facing rural remote professionals. Despite its importance, knowledge of how multidisciplinary rural remote supervisors perceive and/or appreciate their roles is limited. This study was informed by social construction and symbolic interaction theories, and guided by three research questions: 1) What challenges and opportunities do mental health supervisors experience in northern British Columbia? 2) How do frontline workers, supervisors, and senior managers perceive the roles and activities of mental health supervisors in northern British Columbia? 3) How are supervisory approaches in various mental health disciplines different or similar in northern British Columbia? The research methodology was qualitative and the study design adopted an interpretive, social interactionist approach. Source triangulation enhanced both the credibility and transferability of the findings. The sources included three participant groups: frontline mental health workers, mental health supervisors, and senior mental health managers. Another triangulation source was the context and setting review of BC’s complex mental health jurisdictions. Triangulation was also achieved by interviewing participants who worked in different settings, organizations, and geographic locations. Thematic analysis was used for data analysis resulting in 11 manifest themes and the following five latent themes: Difficult, overwhelming responsibilities; stressful, complicated decision making; the endless campaign for professional leadership support; mentorship in remote practice; and a struggle in collaborative plurality. Most of the participants expressed the wish for more support in their professional work. The findings from this study provide employers with new insights into multidisciplinary supervisory work and also emphasize the need for practical and specific ideas for much needed support for rural remote supervisors.
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 | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 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) | 0,005 | 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 ».