Psychological Distress and Help-Seeking Facilitators in Quebec Men: Findings From a Province-Wide Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction It has been well established that men are not inclined to seek psychosocial help. Although barriers preventing psychosocial help-seeking behaviors in men have been extensively documented, few studies have investigated perceived facilitators and preferences involved in these behaviors. Methods Based on an online survey of 2095 Quebec men, this descriptive study explores men’s psychological distress and help-seeking behaviors, perceptions of effective facilitators of help-seeking behaviors, and psychosocial intervention preferences. Results About 30% of the men surveyed presented some form of psychological distress, and very few had used psychosocial services in the last year. Most men did not have a preference regarding the gender of their therapist, although they reported favoring solution-focused interventions and appreciating a continuity in the therapeutic relationship. Men also highly rated the importance of free or low-cost services to facilitate help-seeking behaviors. Finally, they indicated a high probability of consulting, if their doctor would tell them to, or if they noticed that their situation affected on their children, or if they experienced suicidal ideation. Discussion Understanding what encourages men to seek help for mental health difficulties and their preferences in services and intervention may lead to greater service use and improved mental health.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".