Health Issues and Service Utilization of University Students: Experiences, Practices & Perceptions of Students, Staff and Faculty.
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Limited evidence exists concerning the health of young adults, most likely attributable to the fact that young adults perceive themselves to be insusceptible to infirmity. This lack of information extends into higher education sectors, places that have venues for dispensing health information/education to many young adults. What is important to note is that some research indicates that health problems may influence student attrition, particularly first year students; however, information concerning their health problems is inadequate. As such, the overall goal of this exploratory research was to complete a thorough needs assessment of the issues affecting student health from the perspective of the student and faculty and staff that routinely assist students concerning health issues. Specifically, the purpose was to examine health issues and issues that have the potential to affect the health and academics of 1st year students. Additionally the practices, experiences and perceptions concerning university services and service referrals received by first year students, and suggested by staff/faculty that deal with these students was also examined. Students (n=412) reported a wide range of issues that have the potential to affect health, quality of life and academics, namely concerns about studying/exam writing, relationships, time management, finances, self-esteem, obesity, and grief, to name a few. Staff and faculty (n=23) reported dealing with students with a wider range of issues, such as anxiety, anger, depression, mood disorders and sleep disorders. Although students appeared quite knowledgeable about the health services offered on campus, awareness did not translate into use. University personnel should become more actively involved in promoting on-campus services to first year students and advocating the potential implications that well-being may have in successfully completing university. INTRODUCTION The evidence concerning the determinants of population health continues to grow. Early work completed by Lalonde (1981) indicated that there existed three key factors determining health status: environment, genetics and lifestyle. Although this provided a basic framework from which to study health determinants, much has subsequently been learned about health. Today Health Canada (2002) contends that the key factors which are integral in population health include: individual behaviour and coping skills, heredity (biology and genetic endowment), socio-economic status (education, income, social status), social support networks, employment/working conditions, environmental influences (social and physical), access to health care, gender and culture. Healthy lifestyles are a worthy investment, not only for the quality of life of individuals, but also for the country. Illness is costly (Lyons & Langille, 2000) and takes considerable resources (i.e., family, county) to cope with and to enhance compromised well-being. With population aging, increasing life expectancy and the increasing prevalence of chronic conditions and physiological limitations, the burden of illness will intensify if intervention is not mandated. Health research has relatively neglected the young adult population (18 to 22 years of age), most likely attributable to the fact that young adults typically perceive themselves to be insusceptible to infirmity and usually experience optimal levels of health (see, for example, Boehm, Selves, Raleigh, Ronis, Butler, Jacobs, 1993; Hovell, Mewborn, Randle, Fowler-Johnson, 1985; Lipnickey, 1986). Patrick (1995) raises the following issues that have failed to be addressed: But what about college students? Who is responsible for their health? Who has the authority to speak for them? Who is to be held accountable for their preventable illness or death? Is it parents, students, employers of college students, local public health officials, college administrators and trustees, or some combination of these? …
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it