MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992019220 · doi:10.1037/a0036453

Increasing access to mental health care through government-funded psychotherapy: The perspectives of clinicians.

2014· article· en· W1992019220 on OpenAlexaffabout
Stacy Bradley, Martin Drapeau

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienne · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMental Health and Patient Involvement
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthPsychologyGovernment (linguistics)Mental health carePsychotherapistPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The lack of accessibility to mental health care in Canada has been described as a silent crisis with the Canadian Psychological Association proposing possible actions that could be taken to achieve increased accessibility (Peachey, Hicks, & Adams, 2013). Efforts to make psychotherapy more accessible have been implemented in both the United Kingdom (U.K.) and Australian health care systems through government-funded services (Clark et al., 2009; Hickie & Groom, 2002). The aim of the present study was to document the attitudes of psychologists and psychotherapists licensed to practice in Quebec toward accessibility to psychotherapy and government-funded psychotherapy programs. Participants (N = 1,275) completed an online questionnaire; results indicated that 77% of the sample strongly agreed that accessibility to psychotherapy should be increased. Participants indicated that priority for government-funded psychotherapy should be given to those with diagnosable mental health disorders, particularly mood disorders, anxiety disorders, and schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders, and psychological functioning related to health, injury and illness, and family difficulties. Participants indicated that treatment priority should be based on severity of illness. There was stronger agreement that clinicians working within a government-funded psychotherapy program should be paid on a session-to-session basis as opposed to receiving a yearly salary; to be able to set their own fee; and to have freedom to choose the appropriate psychotherapeutic approach (e.g., cognitive behavioural therapy [CBT], emotion-focused therapy [EFT]) and appropriate treatment materials (e.g., psychoeducational handouts) to be used in treatment. Other results concerning the structure of a government-funded psychotherapy program and the implications for increasing accessibility in a Canadian context are discussed.Keywords: psychotherapy, increasing accessibility, mental health care, psychologist, surveyResumeL'accessibilite reduite aux soins de sante mentale au Canada a ete qualifiee de crise silencieuse. La Societe canadienne de psycholo- gie a mis de l'avant des mesures qui pourraient etre prises pour ameliorer la situation (Peachey, Hicks & Adams, 2013). Des mesures visant a ameliorer l'acces a la psychotherapie ont ete mises en oeuvre au sein des regimes de sante du Royaume-Uni et de l'Australie, par l'entremise de services finances par les gouver- nements (Clark et al., 2009; Hickie & Groom, 2002). Le but de la presente etude etait de documenter les attitudes des psychologues et des psychotherapeutes autorises a pratiquer au Quebec a l'egard de l'acces a la psychotherapie et de programmes de psychotherapie finances par le gouvernement. Les participants (N 1275) ont repondu a un questionnaire en ligne. Selon les resultats, 77 % des repondants sont fortement en accord pour que soit accru l'acces a la psychotherapie. Les participants ont indique que les services de psychotherapie finances par le gouvernement devraient etre offerts en priorite pour traiter les troubles de sante mentale diagnosti- cables, en particulier les troubles de l'humeur, les troubles anxieux, la schizophrenie et d'autres psychoses, les troubles psy- chologiques relies a la sante, aux blessures, a la maladie, ainsi que les problemes familiaux. Ils ont de plus indique que l'etablissement des priorites devait se fonder sur la gravite de la maladie. Surtout, ils ont convenu que les cliniciens travaillant dans le cadre d'un programme de psychotherapie finance par le gou- vernement devraient avoir les conditions de travail suivantes : etre remuneres a la seance et non selon un salaire annuel; etre en mesure d'etablir leurs propres honoraires; avoir la liberte de choisir la demarche psychotherapeutique (par ex., la therapie cognitivo-comportementale ou la therapie centree sur les senti- ments) ainsi que les documents de traitement qu'ils jugent appro- pries (feuillets psychopedagogiques et autres). …

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score0.244

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.006
Scholarly communication0.0090.005
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0060.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.203
GPT teacher head0.487
Teacher spread0.284 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienneSame topicMental Health and Patient InvolvementFrench-language works237,207