MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2284521422 · doi:10.1186/s13033-016-0040-3

Service user and family member perspectives on services for mental health, substance use/addiction, and violence: a qualitative study of their goals, experiences and recommendations

2016· article· en· W2284521422 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Rebecca Haskell, Kathryn Graham, Sharon Bernards, Andrea Flynn, Samantha Wells

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Mental Health Systems · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMental Health and Patient Involvement
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoWestern UniversityCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchOntario Ministry of Research and InnovationOntario Ministry of Research, Innovation and ScienceCanada Foundation for Innovation
KeywordsMental healthAddictionHealth administrationQualitative researchSubstance useSubstance abusePsychologyService (business)Mental health serviceSubstance dependenceDomestic violencePsychiatryHealth informaticsNursingPublic healthMedicineSuicide preventionPoison controlEnvironmental healthSociologyBusinessSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Mental health and substance use disorders (MSD) are significant public health concerns that often co-occur with violence. To improve services that address MSD and violence [MSD(V)], it is critical to understand the perspectives of those most affected, people who have sought help for MSD(V) (i.e., "service users"), especially those with co-occurring issues, as well as their family members. METHODS: We conducted structured interviews with 73 service users and 41 family members of service users in two Ontario communities (one urban, one rural) regarding their goals related to help-seeking, positive and negative experiences, and recommendations for improving systems of care. RESULTS: Overall, participants expressed a need for services that: (1) are respectful, nonjudgmental, and supportive, help service users to feel more 'normal' and include education to reduce stigma; (2) are accessible, varied and publicly funded, thereby meeting individual needs and addressing equity concerns at a systems level; and (3) are coordinated, holistic and inclusive of family members who often support service users. CONCLUSIONS: The findings provide a rich understanding of how service users and their families perceive services for MSD(V) issues and identify key ways to better meet their needs.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.542

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.167
GPT teacher head0.479
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations40
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Mental Health SystemsSame topicMental Health and Patient InvolvementFrench-language works237,207