MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210259497 · doi:10.1186/s13643-022-01896-6

Barriers and facilitators associated with the use of mental health services among immigrant students in high-income countries: a scoping review protocol

2022· review· en· W4210259497 on OpenAlexafffund
Christelle Dombou, Olumuyiwa Omonaiye, Sarah Fraser, Jude Mary Cénat, Sanni Yaya

Bibliographic record

VenueSystematic Reviews · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMigration, Health and Trauma
Canadian institutionsGlobal Affairs CanadaUniversity of Ottawa
FundersUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsMental healthCINAHLPsycINFOMedicineThematic analysisImmigrationHealth careMEDLINENursingMedical educationQualitative researchPsychiatryPsychological interventionEconomic growthSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: While the mental health of immigrants is a growing issue that is attracting increasing interest from researchers, the same cannot be said for the mental health of immigrant students especially for international students. Indeed, the mental health of immigrant students and their use of mental health services are still poorly documented despite the significant increase in the number of these students in many high-income countries. This scoping review aims to providing an overview and exploring gaps in existing research regarding access to mental health care among immigrant students by identifying barriers and facilitators associated with the use of mental health services in high-income countries. METHODS: With the help of a professional librarian, we will develop a search strategy including several keywords such as mental health, mental illness, immigrant, students, immigrant students, or international students and access to care or use of mental health services. The following electronic databases will be searched (from their inception onwards): MEDLINE, APA PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science Core Collection, Education Source, and Embase. Studies addressing access to and use of mental health care conducted on immigrant students (adolescent and above) in high-income countries will be included. Two reviewers will independently screen all citations, full-text articles, and abstract data. A narrative summary of findings will be conducted. Data analysis will involve quantitative (e.g., frequencies) and qualitative (e.g., content and thematic analysis) methods. DISCUSSION: The purpose of this scoping review is to better map the literature on the mental health of immigrant students and their use of mental health care services. In doing so, we aim to identify barriers and facilitators to access and use of mental health care. Identifying barriers and facilitators of mental health services by immigrant students will support the development of appropriate interventions that can help improve access and use of mental health services by immigrant students in high-income countries. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework ( osf.io/a2rk6 ).

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)0.098
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.074
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score0.520

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0980.074
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0150.016
Bibliometrics0.0220.016
Science and technology studies0.0060.005
Scholarly communication0.0080.008
Open science0.0070.007
Research integrity0.0100.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0460.008

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.361 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSystematic ReviewsSame topicMigration, Health and TraumaFrench-language works237,207