MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391690440 · doi:10.22605/rrh8341

The landscape of non-psychotic psychiatric illness in rural Canada: a narrative review

2024· review· en· W4391690440 on OpenAlexaffabout
Paquet, Hibbard, Brett-MacLean

Bibliographic record

VenueRural and Remote Health · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Workforce Issues
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCINAHLMental illnessMental healthIndigenousPsychiatryPopulationMedicineGrey literatureMEDLINERural areaAnxietyEnvironmental healthPsychological interventionPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Canada's rural population has diverse demographic features and accounts for 18.9% of Canada's population. Indigenous Peoples (First Nations, Inuit, and Métis), who are highly represented in rural communities, have additional risk factors related to colonialism, and historical and ongoing trauma. Understanding how to best respond to elevated rates of psychiatric illness in rural and remote communities requires an understanding of the unique challenges these communities face in accessing and providing high quality psychiatric services. This article reports a review of published literature on prevalence of non-psychotic psychiatric conditions, as well as the risk and protective factors influencing rates and experience of mental illness in rural and remote communities in Canada to help inform approaches to prevention and treatment. METHODS: This focused narrative review of literature related to rural non-psychotic psychiatric illness in rural and remote Canada published over a 20-year period (October 2001 - February 2023). A review of CINAHL, Medline and Academic Search Complete databases supplemented by gray literature (eg federal and provincial documents, position papers, and clinical practice guidelines) identified by checking reference lists of identified articles, and web searches. A textual narrative approach was used to describe the literature included in the final data set. RESULTS: A total of 32 articles and 13 gray literature documents were identified. Findings were organized and described in relation to depression and anxiety and substance use suicidality and loss; rates for all were noted as elevated in rural communities. Different mental health strategies and approaches were described. Variability in degree of rurality, or proximity to larger metropolitan centers, and different community factors including cohesiveness and industrial basis, were noted to impact mental health risk and highlighted the need for enhancing family physician capacity and responsiveness and innovative community-based interventions, in addition to telepsychiatry. CONCLUSION: Further focus on representative community-based research is critical to expand our knowledge. It is also critical to consider strategies to increase psychiatric care access, including postgraduate medical training and telehealth training.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.374
Threshold uncertainty score0.753

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.018
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.441
Teacher spread0.411 · 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
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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRural and Remote HealthSame topicGlobal Health Workforce IssuesFrench-language works237,207