MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399443264 · doi:10.1080/09638237.2024.2361259

Chinese university students’ help-seeking behaviors when faced with mental health challenges

2024· article· en· W4399443264 on OpenAlexafffund
Xuan Ning, Suli Huang, Carla Hilario, J. Yamanda, Mandana Vahabi, Ming-Sun Poon, Zhanyong Yao, Kenneth Fung, Shirley Cheng, Cun-Xian Jia, Alan Tai-Wai Li, Jonathan P. Wong

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Mental Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Treatment and Access
Canadian institutionsRegent Park Community Health CentreUniversity of TorontoYork UniversityUniversity of British ColumbiaToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNational Social Science Fund of ChinaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMental healthPsychologyHelp-seekingPsychiatryMedical educationMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Mental illnesses and mental health challenges have become increasingly pervasive among Chinese university students. However, the utilization rate of mental health services is low among students. AIMS: We aimed to explore Chinese university students' help-seeking behaviors to understand how they deal with mental health challenges and use the results to inform the development of effective mental health promotion initiatives. METHODS: In this study, we conducted 13 focus group interviews with students in six universities in Jinan, China, including 91 (62%) female students and 56 (38%) male students. We drew on the Theory of Planned Behaviors to guide our thematic analysis to gain a contextual understanding of participants' accounts on help-seeking. RESULTS: Our results have depicted the help-seeking patterns of Chinese university students and show that there are four major behaviors which are self-reliance, seeking support from peers and families, seeking professional support, and accessing virtual mental health care. CONCLUSION: Results from this study can be used to inform the development of mental health literacy programming for students in universities that share similar contexts, and the study has also opened up a new space for using qualitative approaches to study mental health needs and access to care in diverse populations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.507
Threshold uncertainty score0.966

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.371 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations13
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Mental HealthSame topicMental Health Treatment and AccessFrench-language works237,207