Challenges and Solutions for Psychiatry’s Approach to Indigenous People
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Introduction Psychiatry has historically underserved Indigenous people. Earlier, cross-cultural psychiatry assumed that psychiatric disorders were universal and varied little across cultures. This approach has not worked well for Indigenous people who may have different views of mind and mental health. For example, Indigenous philosophy tend to explain the world and states of mental health from a storied approach encompassing relations to land, spiritual beings, ancestors, and the community which can result in different conclusions from conventional psychiatry. Objectives We wanted to explore what modifications in their approach practicing psychiatrists have made to be successful in Indigenous communities and to determine what was common among how communities in which they worked conceptualized mind and mental health. Methods We interviewed psychiatrists working in Indigenous communities regarding what was effective and how they had changed their practice to work in those communities and how those communities had changed them. We used the iterative processing of constructivist grounded theory to find commonalities in their responses. We present from rural and remote Indigenous settings in Canada (Saskatchewan and Northern Ontario), New Zealand, and Maine (USA). Results We found a modified approach to psychiatric services that emphasized Indigenous values and that determined positive aspects of the client’s history as well as problem areas and engaged the client in therapy from the beginning of the evaluation. Some key concepts that emerged from qualitative analysis of interviews and case histories using constructivist grounded theory as a method of analysis included (1) reframing the person’s self-story within a threat-power-meaning network, (2) working with stories about the spirit of the suffering, (3) exploring right relationships and meaningful conduct, (4)acknowledging the intergenerational transmission of suffering. Physicians came to understand that the client sets their goals and defines what recovery means for them in discussion with their family and important community members including elders. This led to a different understanding of what privacy meant to clients. Indigenous cultures encountered were different but appeared to share some similarities including a highly relational approach to defining the self, a collectivist mindset in which the needs of the group can supersede the needs of the individual, a reliance upon stories for transmission of knowledge and culture, and a commitment to a biopsychosocial and spiritual approach. Conclusions Psychiatry can form effective collaborative relationships with Indigenous communities requring modifications in the usual worldview and orientation to how psychiatry is practiced. Disclosure of Interest None Declared
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 | 0,050 | 0,028 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,041 | 0,084 |
| Communication savante | 0,018 | 0,018 |
| Science ouverte | 0,008 | 0,032 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,017 | 0,028 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,009 | 0,001 |
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 ».