MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3036282627 · doi:10.1017/s0144686x20000719

Exploring older adults’ experiences seeking psychological services using the network episode model

2020· article· en· W3036282627 on OpenAlexaff
Brooke Beatie, Corey S. Mackenzie, Genevieve Thompson, Lesley Koven, Tyler Eschenwecker, John R. Walker

Bibliographic record

VenueAgeing and Society · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Treatment and Access
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthMental health literacyPsychologyHelp-seekingMental health serviceService (business)Focus groupQualitative researchPsychological interventionMental illnessGerontologyPsychiatryMedicineSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Older adults’ mental health problems are a growing public health concern, especially because their rate of mental health service use is particularly low. Decades of mental health service utilisation models have been developed, yet key assumptions from these models focus primarily on factors that facilitate or inhibit access into the treatment system without taking into considering the dynamics of how individuals respond to their mental health problems and engage in service utilisation. More recently, dynamic models like the Network Episode Model (NEM-II) have been developed to challenge the underlying, rational choice assumption of traditional utilisation models. Given the multifaceted and complex nature of older adults’ mental health problems, the objective of this study was to examine whether the NEM-II is a helpful and appropriate model for understanding the dynamic process of how older adults navigate the mental health system, including factors that advanced and delayed help-seeking. Our qualitative analyses from 15 interviews with older adults revealed that their backgrounds, social supports and treatment systems influence, and are influenced by, their illness careers. Factors that delayed help-seeking included: a lack of support, ‘inappropriate’ referrals/advice from treatment professionals and poor mental health literacy. This research suggests the NEM-II is a helpful and appropriate theory for understanding older adults’ pathways to treatment, and has implications to enhance older adults’ access to psychological services.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.513
Threshold uncertainty score0.630

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.162
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.211 · 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.

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

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgeing and SocietySame topicMental Health Treatment and AccessFrench-language works237,207