Making sense of sadness: eliciting illness meaning and experience of depression in rural Irish males
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background To analyse and understand the illness experience of depression in rural Irish males. Secondary objectives are to identify their explanatory models of depression, inform mental health service provision in rural areas, and identify suitable interventions for future research. Aim Isolation and rural masculinities are thought to predispose rural Irish males to depression. Despite high levels of depressive symptoms among men in rural areas, lack of awareness and a different language around depression, coupled with stoicism, social isolation, and feminized mental health services, results in reduced help-seeking, under-reporting and under-treatment of depression in this population. Method A purposive sample, selected through the West Cork and Galway/Roscommon Mental Health Services, and General Practitioners, of fourteen men, aged between 25 and 64 years of age, were interviewed in their homes. Data was collected through face-to-face interviews, using the McGill Illness Narrative Interview schedule. These interviews were recorded, transcribed to text, and analysed using a thematic content analysis. Results were integrated using the model of qualitative description. Results Most of the fourteen men reported alcohol and social isolation as precipitating factors of their depression. Suicidal intent and a stubborn attitude were common. Recovery-promoting behaviours included good social and family support, peer-support groups, religious practice and, universally, physical work. Conclusion Rural Irish men view their depression as a disconnection from community, masculinity can be engaged in a positive way to improve mental health, and a sense of belonging is key to recovery. Future research should focus on the development of interventions incorporating these findings, such as community farming initiatives.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".