MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4400650590 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0304907

Understanding the factors related to how East and Southeast Asian immigrant youth and families access mental health and substance use services: A scoping review

2024· review· en· W4400650590 on OpenAlexaff
Chloe Gao, Lianne L. Cho, Avneet Dhillon, So-Yeon Kim, Kimberlyn McGrail, Michael R. Law, Nadiya Sunderji, Skye Barbic

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMigration, Health and Trauma
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMcMaster UniversityWaypoint Centre for Mental Health CareBC Mental Health & Substance Use ServicesUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCINAHLMental healthContext (archaeology)Psychological interventionPsychologyGerontologyMedicineGeographyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of the review is to identify factors related to how East and Southeast Asian immigrant youth aged 12-24 and their families access mental health and substance use (MHSU) services. To address how East and Southeast Asian youth and their families access mental health and substance use services, a scoping review was conducted to identify studies in these databases: PubMed, MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), PsychINFO, CINAHL, and Sociology Collection. Qualitative content analysis was used to deductively identify themes and was guided by Bronfenbrenner's Ecological Systems Theory, the process-person-context-time (PPCT) model, and the five dimensions of care accessibility (approachability, acceptability, availability and accommodation, appropriateness, affordability). Seventy-three studies met the inclusion criteria. The dimensions of healthcare accessibility shaped the following themes: 1) Acceptability; 2) Appropriateness; 3) Approachability; 4) Availability and Accommodation. Bronfenbrenner's Ecological Systems Theory and the PPCT model informed the development of the following themes: 1) Immediate Environment/Proximal Processes (Familial Factors, Relationships with Peers; 2) Context (School-Based Services/Community Resources, Discrimination, Prevention, Virtual Care); 3) Person (Engagement in Services/Treatment/Research, Self-management); 4) Time (Immigration Status). The study suggests that there is a growing body of research (21 studies) focused on identifying acceptability factors, including Asian cultural values and the model minority stereotype impacting how East and Southeast Asian immigrant youth access MHSU services. This review also highlighted familial factors (16 studies), including family conflict, lack of MHSU literacy, reliance on family as support, and family-based interventions, as factors affecting how East and Southeast Asian immigrant youth access MHSU care. However, the study also highlighted a dearth of research examining how East and Southeast Asian youth with diverse identities access MHSU services. This review emphasizes the factors related to the access to MHSU services by East and Southeast Asian immigrant youth and families while providing insights that will improve cultural safety.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0140.015
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.348
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.037 · 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

Citations10
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicMigration, Health and Trauma→French-language works237,207→