Gendering Neighbourhood Marginalization Metrics in Mental Health Services Research: A Cross-Sectional Exploration of a Rural and Small Urban Population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Little is known about the extent to which socioenvironmental characteristics may influence mental health outcomes in smaller population centres or differently among women and men. This study used a gender-based analysis approach to explore individual- and neighbourhood-level sex differences in mental health service use in a context of uniquely smaller urban and rural settlements. Methods: This cross-sectional analysis leveraged multiple person-based administrative health datasets linked with geospatial datasets among the population aged 1 and over in the province of New Brunswick, Canada. We used multinomial logistic regression to examine associations between neighbourhood characteristics with risk of service contacts for mood and anxiety disorders in 2015/2016, characterizing the areal measures among all residents (gender neutral) and by males and females separately (gender specific), and controlling for age group. Results: Among the province’s 707,575 eligible residents, 10.7% (females: 14.0%; males: 7.3%) used mental health services in the year of observation. In models adjusted for gender-neutral neighbourhood characteristics, service contacts were significantly more likely among persons residing in the most materially deprived areas compared with the least (OR = 1.09 [95% CI: 1.05–1.12]); when stratified by individuals’ sex, the risk pattern held for females (OR = 1.13 [95% CI: 1.09–1.17]) but not males (OR = 1.00 [95% CI: 0.96–1.05]). Residence in the most female-specific materially deprived neighbourhoods was independently associated with higher risk of mental health service use among individual females (OR = 1.08 [95% CI: 1.02–1.14]) but not among males (OR = 1.02 [95% CI: 0.95–1.10]). Conclusion: These findings emphasize that research needs to better integrate sex and gender in contextual measures aiming to inform community interventions and neighbourhood designs, notably in small urban and rural settings, to reduce socioeconomic inequalities in the burden of mental disorders.
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 | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".