MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2990130426 · doi:10.1097/phh.0000000000001650

Local Health Department Engagement in Access to Mental Health Services and Mental Health Policy or Advocacy Activities

2022· article· en· W2990130426 on OpenAlexaff
Abraham Deng Ater, S Kurella, Gulzar H. Shah, Kristie C. Waterfield

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Public Health Management and Practice · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPublic Health Policies and Education
Canadian institutionsWorkers Compensation Board of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthPublic healthEnvironmental healthHealth policyPsychologyNursingMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CONTEXT: Mental health is a public health concern that requires national attention at the local level. Major issues facing local health departments (LHDs) to actively engage in mental health activities include inadequate surveillance data and limited resources. OBJECTIVE: To examine the levels of engagement in access to mental health services, as well as policy or advocacy activities, by LHDs characteristics. DESIGN: The study design is cross-sectional based on the national survey of LHDs. We analyzed the survey data from the National Association of County and City Health Officials' 2019 Profile study. Logistic regression was performed with 6 levels of engagement in mental health activities as the outcome measures. RESULTS: LHDs reported that a majority had assessed the gaps in access to mental health (57.69%), followed by other activities-had implemented strategies to increase access to mental health (48.77%), implemented strategies to target underserved populations (40.66%), evaluated strategies to target underserved populations (38.84%), engaged in policy/advocacy to address mental health (32.27%), and finally addressed gaps through provision of mental health (22.31%). LHDs' governance structure was strongly associated with engagement in all 6 mental health activities. LHDs that had performed improvement processes, had behavioral health staff, and had cross-jurisdictional sharing were more likely to be engaged in all 6 of the mental health activities. LHDs were also more likely to be engaged in 5 of the 6 mental health activities if they had some relationships with faith communities and in 4 of the 6 mental health activities if they had some relationships with community health centers. CONCLUSIONS: Levels of engagement in mental health policy or advocacy activities among LHDs were low and varied by LHD characteristics. Intervention strategies may include encouraging LHDs to actively engage in mental health activities, participating in Public Health Accreditation Board accreditation program, and incentivizing mental health workforce retention.

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)0.034
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.370
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0340.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.152
GPT teacher head0.530
Teacher spread0.378 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Public Health Management and PracticeSame topicPublic Health Policies and EducationFrench-language works237,207