MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382602557 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0287162

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

2023· article· en· W4382602557 on OpenAlexaff
Christelle Dombou, Olumuyiwa Omonaiye, Sarah Fraser, Jude Mary Cénat, Karine Fournier, Sanni Yaya

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Treatment and Access
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthCINAHLPsycINFOMental health literacyMedicineMEDLINEPopulationNursingPsychologyPsychological interventionPsychiatryMental illnessEnvironmental healthPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Immigrant students face various challenges in high-income countries that can contribute to the decline of their mental well-being upon arrival in their host country. Despite the growing population of these students in several high-income countries, there is inadequate attention given to their mental health needs and their access to mental health services. Thus, this systematic scoping review aimed to identify gaps in existing research relating to the barriers and facilitators associated with access to and use of mental health services in high-income countries. METHODS: Following the PRISMA-ScR checklist as guidance we systematically searched Ovid Medline, APA PsycInfo, Education Source, CINAHL, Web of Science databases for peer reviewed articles related to barriers and facilitators of mental health service use among immigrant students. We conducted a narrative evidence synthesis to highlight barriers and facilitators to the use of mental health services. RESULTS: Out of the 2407 articles initially found, 47 studies met the inclusion criteria and were considered for this review. The increasing attention towards the mental health concerns of immigrant students and their access to mental health services is evident. However, various barriers like stigma, insufficient knowledge, or adherence to traditional gender roles (such as masculinity) hinder their utilization of these services. On the other hand, factors such as being a woman, having a strong sense of cultural adaptation, or possessing adequate mental health literacy serve as facilitators for accessing mental health services. CONCLUSION: These students have unique experiences, and their needs are often unmet. To improve their mental health and use of mental health services, it is important to consider the barriers they face and their unique experience in their specific life context and to develop tailored prevention and intervention programs.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.068
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.068
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.006
Bibliometrics0.0130.011
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.296 · 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

Citations41
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicMental Health Treatment and AccessFrench-language works237,207