"Weathering a Hidden Storm": An Application of Andersen's Behavioral Model of Health, and Health Services Use for Those with Diagnosable Anxiety Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: Research has primarily focused on depression and mood disorders, but little research has been devoted to an examination of mental health services use amongst those with diagnosable anxiety disorder (Wittchen et al., 2002; Bergeron et al., 2005). This study examined the possible predicting factors for mental health services utilization amongst those with identifiable anxiety disorder in the Canadian population. The methods used for this study was the application of Andersen’s Behavioral Model of Health Services Use, where predisposing, need and enabling characteristics were regressed on the dependent variable of mental health services use. This study used the Canadian Community Health Survey (cycle 1.2: Mental Health and Well-Being) in a secondary data analysis. Several multiple logistics models predicted the likelihood to seek and use mental health services. Predisposing characteristics of gender and age, Enabling characteristics of education and geographical location, and those with co-occurring mood disorders were at the greatest increased likelihood to seek and use mental health services.
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 | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".