The needs of rural and urban young, middle-aged and older adults with a serious mental illness.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The delivery of mental health services is often provided through agencies set up to serve both young and older adults. Young and older adults with a severe mental illness (SMI) have different needs; this study was designed to identify important differences. METHODS: This is a descriptive study based on a representative sample of mental health services users from northwestern Ontario (n = 532 [one-half rural and one-half urban]). The service provider most familiar with each user completed a questionnaire. We compared the characteristics and needs of users aged 18-29, 30-59 and 60 years and older. RESULTS: The results showed that a greater proportion of individuals in the older group (55.3%) had physical comorbidities, compared with people in the younger and middle-aged groups (30.3% and 45.2%, respectively; p = 0.004), and more people in the older group used psychotropic medications (83.0% v. 62.9% and 75.5%, respectively; p = 0.006). Although the level of need was great for all age groups, the older group had greater need for medication management, physical health care, self-care and other activities of daily living (p < 0.05). A greater need for support was also identified for the family of older adults (p = 0.005). A lesser need was identified for psychotherapy or counselling, vocational training, and correction, probation or parole matters (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: We identified important differences in the needs of young, middle-aged and older people with an SMI. Addressing the needs of the older adults assumes a system that is responsive to their particular situations. Further work to ensure that the treatment of older adults reflects these differences and is based on best practices should be conducted.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".