Overcoming structural inequity in healthcare for people living with substance use issues and mental illness.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Structural stigma arbitrarily limits the opportunities and/or constrains the right of persons with lived and living experience of mental health problems and illnesses and/or substance use (PWLLE). While it often occurs unknowingly, it creates inequities embedded in the fabric of our social institutions, organizations, and our shared ways of thinking and acting. In health care, structural stigma exists in the laws, policies, practices, and models of care that deprioritize, dehumanize, and fail to treat PWLLE as equitably as those with physical health concerns. Such unfairness leads to overall poorer healthcare access, less availability of evidence-based services, and lower quality of care for these individuals, whether their concerns relate to physical health, mental health, and/or substance use. In 2019, the Mental Health Commission of Canada (MHCC) set out on a multi-year project to examine structural stigma in health-care settings and develop tools and approaches for dismantling it. Through this work, the MHCC has published a literature review, produced a conceptual framework for dismantling structural stigma in health systems, and co-developed a measure with PWLLE to assess structural stigma in different healthcare settings and contexts. A major part of this work includes engaging with PWLLE and health leaders to better understand the priorities and strategies for successfully addressing structural stigma within the health system. The presentation will showcase one such engagement project, known as the Champions and Changemakers project. The goal was to learn and work with champions within the Canadian health system (health providers, leaders, and decision makers, PWLLE, other stakeholders) who were implementing innovations to enhance the equity of care for PWLLE- including changes to service delivery, models of care, training models, as well as policy, advocacy and leadership and power-sharing structures. Through this collaboration process, we expanded knowledge of the key ingredients and processes for structural change (features, strategies, context, mechanisms, outcomes), and co-designed an implementation guide that can be used to provide guidance to others interested in reducing structural stigma within their own organizations. The collaboration and co-design process involved several group and one-on-one interviews and stakeholder meetings, facilitated participatory workshops with all stakeholders, and ongoing input, feedback, and review from all stakeholders in the building of the guide. In addition to the knowledge products and relationship building that came from this project, the other main impact is that the MHCC is now working to build a sustainable community of practice to promote and support ongoing work and efforts in addressing structural stigma in the Canadian healthcare context. Learning Objectives: Describe and understand Structural Stigma and how it creates inequity in healthcare for PWLLE; Demonstrate an understanding of key elements of select promising practices that support improved access to- and quality of- health care for PWLLE; Identify opportunities to disrupt and dismantle structural stigma, and; Understand the next steps to continue to address mental health and substance use-related structural stigma in health-care settings. Audience: Health-care leaders, administrators, providers, policymakers, people with lived and living experience and their caregivers and/or family of choice.
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 | 0,012 | 0,024 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,011 | 0,008 |
| Communication savante | 0,005 | 0,006 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,019 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,006 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,006 | 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 ».