MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2749422484 · doi:10.1186/s12939-017-0633-8

An exploratory study assessing psychological distress of indigents in Burkina Faso: a step forward in understanding mental health needs in West Africa

2017· article· en· W2749422484 on OpenAlexafffund
Émilie Pigeon-Gagné, Ghayga Hassan, Maurice Yaogo, Valéry Ridde

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for Equity in Health · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Treatment and Access
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchWorld Bank Group
KeywordsMental healthHealth services researchPublic healthSocial policyPsychological distressHealth policyExploratory researchEnvironmental healthMedicinePsychologyEconomic growthSocioeconomicsPsychiatryPolitical scienceNursingSociologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Poverty is known as an important determinant of health, but empirical data are still missing on the relationships between poverty, other adverse living conditions, and psychological distress, particularly in low-income countries. This study aimed to assess mental health needs and psychological distress among the poorest in rural settings in Burkina Faso where food security and access to water, electricity, schooling, and healthcare are limited. METHODS: We randomly selected 2000 individuals previously identified as indigents by a community-targeting process. Interviewers visited participants (n = 1652) in their homes and completed a questionnaire on mental health variables that included presence and intensity of anxious, depressive, psychotic, and aggressive symptoms, as well as level of psychological distress. Descriptive statistics, Spearman correlations, and logistic regressions were performed. RESULTS: In all, 40.2% of the sample reported 10 or more anxious/depressive symptoms in the past 30 days, and 25.5% reported having experienced at least one psychotic symptom over their lifetime, 65.6% of whom had had those symptoms for many years. The number of anxious and depressive symptoms was significantly associated with the level of psychological distress (r = 0.423, p < .001). Predictors of distress level included: poor health condition (F(1) = 23.743, p <. 001), being a woman (F(1) = 43.926, p < .001), not having any income (F(1) = 16.185, p < .001), having begged for food in the past 30 days (F(1) = 12.387, p < .001), being illiterate, and being older (F(1) = 21.487, p < .001). Approximately one third of respondents reporting anxious/depressive or psychotic symptoms (28.2 and 30.0%, respectively) had not talked about their symptoms to anyone in their social network. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest alarmingly high levels of psychological distress and reported symptoms among the poorest in rural settings in Burkina Faso, which can be explained by their difficult living conditions. However, these results must be interpreted from a transcultural perspective to avoid decontextualized misinterpretations. Ethnographic works are needed to document the larger context within which these distress results can be analyzed.

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)0.001
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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.344
GPT teacher head0.576
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations21
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal for Equity in HealthSame topicMental Health Treatment and AccessFrench-language works237,207