Clinical Approaches to Cultural Diversity in Mental Health Care and Specificities of French Transcultural Consultations: A Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Cultural context substantially affects the experience and clinical expression of psychiatric diseases, while cultural factors limit both access to and effectiveness of care, especially for migrant families requiring specific types of services. We conducted a scoping review on psychiatric services adapted to cultural diversity, to compare these models of care to the French Transcultural Psychotherapy model. Methods: Systematic electronic search of databases (PubMed and PsycINFO), manual search of archives of journals dealing with transcultural psychiatry, and consultations with international experts, to identify all papers describing clinical models devoted to psychiatric care for migrants, published between January 1990 and October 2018. Narrative synthesis of the included articles. Results: The study included 29 papers. The specificities of psychiatric services for migrant families are linked to the host country's migration patterns and citizenship model. In English-speaking countries, specialized services for ethnic minorities offer ethnic matching of the therapist and patient. In Canada, indirect transcultural consultation services have existed since the late 1990s. Australia emphasizes the networking of consultation services and professional training in cultural competence, while the Nordic countries (Sweden, Finland, Norway, and Denmark) focus management on trauma. In France, psychotherapy services, with flexible numbers of therapists involved according to the situation, have existed since 1990. Discussion: Most initiatives place emphasis on training and supervision, in an indirect approach not specifically focused on the patient, or offer cultural matching of patient and therapist. The French transcultural approach, on the contrary, makes the family's culture and its cultural diversity an integral part of the therapy process.
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 | 0.019 | 0.056 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.022 | 0.018 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| 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".