HELP-SEEKING AND AUTONOMY FOR TREATMENT AMONG PATIENTS WITH MOOD DISORDERS AND SCHIZOPHRENIA: A SCOPING REVIEW
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background Help-seeking represents an adaptive coping mechanism to address mental health issues by seeking external assistance. There is a known gap between the prevalence of help-seeking and mental illnesses, with younger individuals often reluctant to seek help. Additionally, autonomy refers to the right of capacitous adults to make decisions regarding their treatment, allowing them to manage their illnesses independently without undue influence. In psychiatric care, shared decision-making is designed to support patients’ autonomy. Both help-seeking and autonomy are critical factors in psychiatric treatment delay. Although help-seeking and autonomy are considered influenced by treatment preferences and differences in social and cultural backgrounds, a comprehensive systematic review of help-seeking and autonomy has not been yet explored in mood disorders and schizophrenia. Aims & Objectives This scoping review aimed to assess the methodologies and assessments employed in research on help-seeking and autonomy concerning the treatment of mood disorders and schizophrenia. Method We searched electronic bibliographic databases such as MEDLINE and EMBASE using keywords related to “help-seeking,” “autonomy,” “mood disorders,” and “schizophrenia”. We included studies conducting evaluations related to help-seeking and autonomy for treatments in patients with mood disorders and schizophrenia. We extracted the following information: author, year of publication, country, study design, participant characteristics, outcome measurements, and study results. Results Of the 12,665 records identified, 40 articles were included (113,899 participants, mean age; 21-52 years). Thirty-seven articles (92.5 %) were related to help-seeking, and three articles (7.5 %) concerned autonomy. Twenty-seven articles (67.5 %) were on mood disorders, 11 articles (27.5 %) were related to schizophrenia, and 2 articles (5.0 %) included mixed populations. Intervention studies of help- seeking were conducted in 25 articles (67.6 %) in mood disorders. Regarding the results of the qualitative studies (13 articles), stigma (4 articles, 30.8 %), and the degree of symptoms (3 articles, 23.1 %) were related to help-seeking. Along with the assessment of autonomy in mood disorders, only one article results showed an association with depressive symptoms. In schizophrenia, help-seeking was reported in 12 articles (32.4 %). The knowledge/education-related (4 articles, 33.3 %) and symptoms (3 articles, 25.0 %) were associated with help-seeking in patients with schizophrenia. For autonomy, only qualitative study was included, which used bio-empirical assessments. The direct association between help-seeking and autonomy was not examined in both articles on mood disorders and schizophrenia. Discussion & Conclusion This scoping review highlighted a notable gap in the existing evidence, indicating a lack of data on autonomy in mood disorders and schizophrenia. A plausible connection exists between help-seeking and autonomy, particularly concerning symptoms in mood disorders and schizophrenia. Since few studies have compared cultural differences, international comparative studies are needed. This review has limitations, such as data on patients over 18 years old or under treatment. Therefore, future research should consider integrating these aspects into their evaluations.
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 | 0,009 | 0,044 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,005 | 0,004 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,020 | 0,022 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 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 ».