MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2153760212 · doi:10.1108/jpmh-06-2013-0048

The Global Model of Public Mental Health through the WHO QualityRights project

2013· article· en· W2153760212 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jean‐François Pelletier, Denise Fortin, Marc Laporta, Marie‐Pascale Pomey, Jean-Luc Roelandt, Pauline Guézennec, Michael J. Murray, Paul DiLeo, Larry Davidson, Michael Rowe

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Public Mental Health · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMental Health and Patient Involvement
Canadian institutionsInstitut universitaire en santé mentale de MontréalUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthCitizenshipConvention on the Rights of Persons with DisabilitiesPublic relationsCharterPolitical scienceLegislationHealth promotionPublic healthPromotion (chess)Human rightsSociologyPublic administrationMedicineNursingPsychiatryLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to update the Global Model of Public Mental Health (GMPMH) in light of the WHO QualityRights project. Design/methodology/approach – Being able to refer to international conventions and human rights standards is a key component of a genuine global approach that is supportive of individuals and communities in their quest for recovery and full citizenship. The GMPMH was inspired by the ecological approach in health promotion programs, adding to that approach the individuals as agents of mental health policies and legislation transformation. The GMPMH integrates recovery- and citizenship-oriented psychiatric practices through the Ottawa Charter for Health Promotion (WHO, 1986). Findings – Updating the GMPMH through the WHO QualityRights Toolkit highlights the need for a new form of governance body, namely the Civic Forum, which is inclusive of local communities and persons in recovery. People with mental health disabilities, intellectual disabilities, and substance use conditions can be “included in the community” (UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, Article 19) only if the community is informed and welcoming, for instance through a Civic Forum and its organizing Local Council of Mental Health. Research limitations/implications – Transition from social marginalization to full citizenship represents a daunting challenge in public mental health care. An approach that focuses primarily on individuals is not sufficient in creating access to valued roles those individuals will be able to occupy in community settings. Instead, public intervention and debate are required to promote and monitor the bond of citizenship that connects people to their communities. Originality/value – The GMPMH is the result of a conceptual cross-breeding between recovery and health promotion (WHO, 1986). The GMPMH is an offspring of the ecological approach in health promotion programs, adding to that approach individuals as agents of mental health transformation. It refers to international conventions and human rights standards as a central component of a genuine global approach. A community-based participatory research design is well suited, which includes a Civic Forum for local communities to become involved and supportive of service users in their quality and human rights assessments.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.467
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.417
GPT teacher head0.501
Teacher spread0.085 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations19
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Public Mental HealthSame topicMental Health and Patient InvolvementFrench-language works237,207