MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3206650848 · doi:10.29117/quarfe.2021.0125

Barriers and Facilitators to Mental Health Help-seeking among Older Adults: A Systematic Review

2021· review· en· W3206650848 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Usra Abushara Elshaikh, Rayan Sheik, Raghad Khalid Saeed, Tawanda Chivese, Diana Alsayed Hassan

Bibliographic record

VenueBuilding Resilience at Universities: Role of Innovation and Entrepreneurship · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Treatment and Access
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthHelp-seekingMEDLINEPsychological interventionInclusion (mineral)Stigma (botany)MedicineAnxietyPsychologyGerontologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Older adults are very unlikely to seek mental health help. There are multiple factors that contribute to a person’s final decision to seek formal help. The aim of this study is to systematically review and summarize quantitative literature on the barriers and facilitators that influence older adult’s mental health help-seeking behaviors. Methods : Four databases including PubMed-Medline, EMBASE, ProQuest central, and Scopus were searched to identify barriers and/or facilitators to mental health help-seeking behaviors. Studies were included if they satisfied the following criteria: Articles that were quantitative studies published during the period between 2015-2021, that address barriers and/or facilitators to mental health help seeking among older adults aged 65 years old or older and examining depression, anxiety, and psychological distress disorders. Help-seeking was defined as receiving a consultation from health professionals such as a general practitioner, clinical psychologist, councilor, or social worker. Study quality and risk of bias was assessed using The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Results: Five cross-sectional studies met the inclusion criteria for this review. These studies were from Australia, United States, and Malaysia, and were carried out during the period 2015-2021. Two studies examined both facilitators and barriers while three studies examined barriers only. Neither of the studies examined facilitators only. The prevalence of seeking mental health help among elderly people ranged between 77% to 82%. Cost, stigma, and beliefs of the effectiveness of mental health counseling, were the most reported key barriers. Main reported facilitators included prior positive experience with mental health services, high level of education, and a high-income level. Conclusion: The findings reported in this systematic review can be used in future research and practical implications to assess the barriers and facilitators among older adults.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.050
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.050
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.006
Bibliometrics0.0120.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBuilding Resilience at Universities: Role of Innovation and Entrepreneurship→Same topicMental Health Treatment and Access→French-language works237,207→