Community stakeholders' perspectives on youth mental health in India: Problems, challenges and recommendations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: India has a large youth population whose mental health needs must be addressed. This includes promotion of positive mental health, with early detection and effective intervention for mental health disorders. Understanding the perspectives of community stakeholders working with youth is pivotal to this effort. Current study aimed to bring together a group of community stakeholders (eg, parents, teachers, policy makers) to understand their perspectives on youth mental health problems, challenges in provision of care, and to provide recommendations to address these concerns at national level. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was conducted across two sites in India: Chennai and New Delhi. Three group meetings were conducted involving 52 participants, including governmental, non-governmental and community representatives working with youth. The proceedings were manually recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using thematic analysis method. RESULTS: Many youth mental health problems were similar across the two sites. The commonest drivers of mental health problems were reported to be academic pressure, substance use and problematic internet/social media use. Stigma and lack of awareness were identified as the most important challenges acting as barriers to seeking mental health help by youth. Prioritizing youth mental health as a national programmes along with strong political will were the major recommendations suggested by the stakeholders. CONCLUSION: Initial findings suggest that prioritizing youth mental health programmes in India would be advantageous. Inclusive and collaborative approach, involving community stakeholders working with youth in providing services that promote mental health and early access to care will help in developing healthy young citizens.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".