MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2512146043 · doi:10.1177/0004867416662150

Systematic review of interventions for Indigenous adults with mental and substance use disorders in Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States

2016· review· en· W2512146043 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionPsychosocialMental healthIndigenousMedicinePsychiatryIntervention (counseling)Clinical psychologyMental illnessInclusion (mineral)PsychologyGerontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to systematically review the evidence-base for the effectiveness of culturally unadapted, culturally adapted and culture-based interventions for Indigenous adults with mental or substance use disorders. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of scientific databases, government websites and web-based Indigenous research repositories. We sought studies using designs comparing an intervention group to a control/comparator group or pre- and post-test designs, published between 2000 and 2015 examining interventions to improve individual-level outcomes (e.g. remission, symptoms, quality of life, functioning) or service-level outcomes (e.g. number of interventions delivered) for Indigenous adults with mental or substance use disorders in Australia, Canada, New Zealand or the United States. RESULTS: A total of 16 studies met inclusion criteria. Virtually all North American studies (6 US and 1 Canadian) evaluated culturally unadapted interventions, all of which were interventions for substance use. Two-thirds of Australian and New Zealand studies evaluated culturally adapted interventions and included samples with mental disorders. Of eight culturally unadapted psychological/psychosocial, pharmacological and educational intervention studies, seven reported significant improvements on at least one measure of psychological well-being, mental health problem severity, or significantly reduced alcohol or illicit drug use. Of seven culturally adapted psychological/psychosocial intervention studies, all reported significant improvement on at least one measure of symptoms of mental illness, functioning, and alcohol use. One culture-based psychological/psychosocial intervention study significantly reduced problem severity in medical and psychiatric domains. CONCLUSION: There remains inconclusive evidence regarding interventions due to a small and methodologically weak evidence-base. The literature would be enhanced by intervention replication and outcome standardisation, validating the outcome instruments used in Indigenous populations, including sample size calculations and using stronger research designs (e.g. interrupted time-series designs). Robust implementation and outcomes research is needed to further progress evidence-based practice in Indigenous mental health.

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.

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)0.001
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: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.455
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.310 · 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