MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3008728288 · doi:10.2196/14835

Evaluation of Electronic Mental Health Implementation in Northern Territory Services Using the Integrated “Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services” Framework: Qualitative Study

2020· article· en· W3008728288 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Buaphrao Raphiphatthana, Michelle Sweet, Stefanie Puszka, Megan Whitty, Kylie Dingwall, Tricia Nagel

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Mental Health · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersStrong
KeywordsMental healthQualitative researchNursingContext (archaeology)Health carePublic relationsAction researchService providerMedicineService (business)PsychologyBusinessPsychiatrySociologyPolitical scienceMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Electronic mental health is a promising strategy to bridge the treatment gap in mental health care. Training workshops have been delivered to service providers working with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people at a primary health care level to raise awareness and knowledge of electronic mental health approaches. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to understand service providers' perspectives and experiences of electronic mental health adoption. More specifically, it aimed to use the integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (i-PARIHS) framework to further identify and understand how different factors facilitate or impede electronic mental health uptake within primary health care settings providing services to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. METHODS: Qualitative interviews were conducted with 57 service providers working with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, who had undergone electronic mental health training workshops. RESULTS: Several factors related to innovation (electronic mental health approach), recipients (service providers as an individual and as a team), and context (local, organizational, and external contexts) were found to influence electronic mental health uptake. Particularly, organizational readiness, in terms of information technology resources and infrastructure, policies, workforce and culture, and processes to mandate electronic mental health use, were found to be significant impediments to electronic mental health utilization. These findings led to the development of a three-phase implementation strategy that aims to enhance electronic mental health adoption by addressing organizational readiness before and post electronic mental health training. CONCLUSIONS: The i-PARIHS provides a useful determinant framework that deepens our understanding of how different factors impede or facilitate electronic mental health adoption in this setting. This insight was used to develop a practical and comprehensive implementation strategy to enhance the utilization of electronic mental health approaches within primary health care settings, involving three phases: pretraining consultations, training workshops, and post-training follow-up support.

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)0.023
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.140

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0230.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.215
GPT teacher head0.629
Teacher spread0.414 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations15
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Mental HealthSame topicDigital Mental Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207