MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2160372437 · doi:10.1177/070674370505001009

Determinants of Service Use among Young Canadians with Mental Disorders

2005· article· en· W2160372437 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Emilie Bergeron, Léo-Roch Poirier, Louise Fournier, Pasquale Roberge, Geneviève Barrette

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Treatment and Access
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthPsychologyPsychiatryMedicineGerontologyClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To identify the determinants of service use by young Canadians with mental health problems. METHODS: Data were drawn from a recent large Canadian mental health survey. The analyses were conducted on a subsample of 1092 Canadians aged 15 to 24 years and identified as presenting a mood disorder, an anxiety disorder, or a substance-related disorder in the 12 months preceding the survey. We classified variables potentially associated with any type of service use for a mental health problem over a 12-month period according to predisposing, enabling, and need factors. We conducted weighted multivariate logistic regressions to determine the association of each factor with service use. RESULTS: In the final model, being female and living alone were the predisposing factors associated with service use. None of the enabling factors predicted help seeking. In regard to the perceived need factors, those who had difficulties with social situations were more likely to use services. Having a mood disorder and (or) having a diagnosed chronic illness were the evaluated need factors associated with service use. CONCLUSION: Certain groups of young Canadians are less likely to seek help for mental health problems and could be the target of interventions aimed at increasing service use.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 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

Citations59
Published2005
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of PsychiatrySame topicMental Health Treatment and AccessFrench-language works237,207