A community informed, integrated approach to crisis care response
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Responses to mental health crises have recently gained significant attention, recognizing that these interactions may have substantial, potentially life and death consequences for those already in distress. Standard responses to mental health emergencies may involve 9-- dispatchers, paramedic services, police services, hospital emergency department (ED) services and a range of other community services. Demands for emergency mental health care in Canada and internationally have increased, and many people experience repeat visits to the ED and have needs that remain unmet. Of particular focus are individuals of lower socioeconomic status, Black and Indigenous communities, racialized people, 2SLGBTQ+, and immigrant communities. Members of these communities are disproportionately affected by intersecting structures of oppression that negatively affect their mental health and are at greater risk for negative interactions with emergency services. Approach: Framed by critical theory, we aimed to identify what is working well, what is needed, and the core components of a best practice approach to mental health crisis care. Specific to this approach was an intentional engagement with the needs of underserved communities who continue to have disproportionately negative interactions with crisis care systems, and an intent to consider non-medicalized approaches to mental health support, including those that account for the social determinants of health. The research team, partnered with Middlesex-London Paramedic Service and TAIBU Community Health Centre, conducted a critical qualitative ethnographic case study exploring emergency mental health response in Ontario, Canada. Semi-structured interviews (n=53), open-ended surveys (n=60), and document analyses were carried out from January 2022-December 2023. Interviews and surveys were conducted across various sectors. Participants included people who have required crisis support needs, health care management, and frontline workers from community-based organizations, paramedic services, police services, and hospital emergency department staff. Data were coded and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. Results: From these data, key themes were identified, and 9 key components of crisis care responses were developed into a framework. This framework was co-developed with community partners, and additional feedback from community organizations was sought, and service users were involved in reviewing the framework. This feedback was integrated into the final framework which includes pre-crisis, crisis, and post crisis phases. Integral to the application of this framework is ongoing, continuous critical reflection on all 9 components. The key components of this model include: . Relational care 2. Choice 3. Accessibility 4. Spaces of care 5. Social determinants of health 6. Collaboration 7. Community-engagement 8. Trauma-informed, and 9. Continuity of care. Implications: The model holds the potential to diversify mental health crisis responses and make metal health services more inclusive and sensitive to the needs of the specific community in which they are deployed. Application of this framework requires ongoing, continuous, critical reflection of all nine components, and aims to inform ongoing assessment of existing crisis care responses and to inform development of new response models of crisis care.
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 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 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 ».