[The Global Model of Public Mental Health and Recovery Mentors].
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Objectives The aim of this paper is to revisit the Global Model of Public Mental Health (GMPMH) in light of the 4th Civic Forum. Recovery mentors of the University of Recovery chaired this public event, which was held in East-end Montreal, Canada, in 2016. The University of Recovery is a concept of co-learning among its members.Methods Being able to refer to international conventions and human rights standards is a key component of a genuine global approach that is supportive of individuals and communities in their quest for recovery and full citizenship. The GMPMH was inspired by the ecological approach in public health and health promotion programs, while adding to that approach the recovery mentors, as agents of mental health policies and legislation transformation. The GMPMH integrates recovery- and citizenship-oriented practices through the Ottawa Charter for Health Promotion of the World Health Organization. Indeed, here the GMPMH is said to be global in that the supranational and individual levels reinforce each other, taking turns with a) a set of legal rules and international conventions on human rights, including those of disabled persons, and b) the active involvement and agency of recovery mentors who can evoke these rules and conventions as part of a plea for the recognition of their personal and collective capacity for change; they acted as tracers of recovery trajectories during the Civic Forum. The GMPMH was first published in 2009, and revisited in 2013. While this latter revision was based on the 3rd Civic Forum, in this paper we use the same approach to revisit the GMPMH as underpinned by the findings and recommendations of the 4th Civic Forum, which discussed questions related to work and employment.Results Updating the GMPMH in light of the Civic Forum underlines the need for a more inclusive type of governance regarding policy and systems transformation. Local communities and persons in recovery can reach each other to promote change and capacity building, for instance through quality assessment, and evaluation of human rights' level of respect in healthcare facilities and more broadly. People with mental health challenges ought to be "included in the community" - as this is a right, not a reward (UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, art. 19). This is achievable if the community is informed and welcoming, for instance in getting involved with a Civic Forum and its organizing committee. The degree to which a transformational agenda is participatory is revealed as a predictor of the degree to which the broader community can be reflexive about its own inclusiveness for a genuinely global approach of public mental health, and with a cascading emulation effect.Conclusion Transition from social marginalization to full citizenship represents a daunting challenge in public mental healthcare. Creating access to the valued roles which individuals will be able to occupy in community and workplace settings requires capacity building and inter-sectorial synchronicity, as suggested by recovery mentors who can act as tracers to reveal obstacles and gateways in the recovery journey. Public intervention and debate are required to promote and monitor the bond of citizenship that connects people to their communities, and the quality of this bond needs to be included in the scope of public mental health for continuity and equity of access.
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 | 0,016 | 0,014 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,010 | 0,039 |
| Communication savante | 0,015 | 0,015 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,016 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,010 | 0,010 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,012 | 0,003 |
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 ».