MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2001087242 · doi:10.1300/j045v21n04_04

The Impact of Deinstitutionalization of Psychiatric Hospitals on Psychological Distress of the Community in Canada

2006· article· en· W2001087242 on OpenAlexaffabout
Patricia A. Sealy, Paul C. Whitehead

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Health & Social Policy · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHealthcare Decision-Making and Restraints
Canadian institutionsMiddlesex London Health UnitWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthDistressPopulationPsychiatryPsychological distressPsychologyConstruct (python library)Mental illnessGerontologyMedicineClinical psychologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: There has been a plethora of studies that evaluate the impact of deinstitutionalization of psychiatric services, but they have not examined whether this policy has had an impact on the broader community. The present study addresses this gap by evaluating the impact of the deinstitutionalization of psychiatric hospitals on the mental health of the general population in Canada. METHOD: This research builds on an empirical analysis of 40 years of the process of deinstitutionalization of psychiatric services in Canada (Sealy and Whitehead 2004). An experimental design is simulated through the use of a derived construct, earlier vs. later deinstitutionalization, in order to test whether the policy of deinstitutionalization has achieved the goal of decreasing levels of psychological distress for people in the community. This study attempts to rectify some of the methodological limitations of past evaluations by standardizing the rates of deinstitutionalization among the provinces and taking into consideration the impact of the interaction among levels of perceived social support and the various social correlates of psychological distress. Cross sectional data from the 1994/95 (n = 16,989) and the 1998/99 waves of the National Population Health Survey (n = 14,682) are used to measure levels of psychological distress. RESULTS: Provinces that implemented this policy earlier have levels of psychological distress that are significantly lower than the provinces that implemented deinstitutionalization later. All high risk groups (people with lower levels of income and education, younger people, people living in urban areas) have significantly lower levels of psychological distress in 1998/99 (as compared to 1994/95) with the exception of single parents in the provinces that implemented deinstitutionalization earlier. CONCLUSION: Based on the NPHS, the earlier implementation of deinstitutionalization is associated with lower levels of psychological distress of the community as compared to the provinces that implemented deinstitutionalization later.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.648
Threshold uncertainty score0.750

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.449
Teacher spread0.410 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Health & Social PolicySame topicHealthcare Decision-Making and RestraintsFrench-language works237,207