Exploring pathways to mental healthcare for urban Aboriginal young people: a qualitative interview study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To explore the perceptions of Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Service (ACCHS) staff involved in providing mental healthcare to Aboriginal young people of the current and ideal pathways to mental healthcare for urban Aboriginal young people attending ACCHSs, and to identify what additional supports staff may need to provide optimal mental healthcare to Aboriginal young people. DESIGN: Qualitative interview study conducted during May 2016-2017. SETTING: Primary care, at two ACCHSs participating in the Study of Environment on Aboriginal Resilience and Child Health in New South Wales. PARTICIPANTS: Purposive sampling of staff involved in mental healthcare pathways of Aboriginal young people, including general practitioners (GPs), nurses and Aboriginal Health Workers (AHWs). RESULTS: All individuals approached for interview (n=21) participated in the study. Four overarching themes and seven sub-themes were identified: availability and use of tools in practice (valuing training and desire for tools and established pathways), targeting the ideal care pathway (initiating care and guiding young people through care), influencing the care pathway (adversities affecting access to care and adapting the care pathway) and assessing future need (appraising service availability). CONCLUSIONS: Participants desired screening tools, flexible guidelines and training for healthcare providers to support pathways to mental healthcare for Aboriginal young people. Both GPs and AHWs were considered key in identifying children at risk and putting young people onto a pathway to receive appropriate mental healthcare. AHWs were deemed important in keeping young people on the care pathway, and participants felt care pathways could be improved with the addition of dedicated child and adolescent AHWs. The ACCHSs were highlighted as essential to providing culturally appropriate care for Aboriginal young people experiencing mental health problems, and funding for mental health specialists to be based at the ACCHSs was considered a priority.
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 | 0.013 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".