Association between preferred language and use of mental health services among home care recipients with schizophrenia spectrum and other psychotic disorders: A retrospective cohort study in Ontario, Canada, 2010 to 2015
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Language is an important demographic factor that may impact patients' interactions with the healthcare system. This may become more apparent for individuals with a mental illness. The objective of this study was to evaluate whether individual language was associated with the use of inpatient and outpatient psychiatric services among home care recipients with schizophrenia spectrum and other psychotic disorders. We conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study using health administrative data. The study population included all individuals aged 18-105 with schizophrenia spectrum and other psychotic disorders, identified via a validated algorithm, who were receiving home care in Ontario, Canada between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2015. Home care data was used to identify patients' primary language, categorized as Anglophone, Francophone, or Allophone. Mental health service use was evaluated over a one-year period following their first home care assessment in the study period and included the rate of outpatient psychiatrist visits and mental health-related emergency department (ED) visits and hospitalizations. Multivariable regression evaluated the association between primary language and mental health service use. The cohort consisted of 9,436 patients (85.8% Anglophones, 3.3% Francophones, 11.0% Allophones). Mental health service use was low among all linguistic groups during the one-year study period, with 53.4% with no outpatient psychiatrist visits and 83.3% and 83.0% with no mental health-related hospitalizations or ED visits, respectively. Francophones had a higher rate of mental health-related hospitalizations compared to Anglophones (adjusted relative risk = 1.36, 95% confidence interval 1.02-1.80), with no differences in hospitalization rates between Allophones and Anglophones. Language was not associated with the rate of outpatient psychiatrist visits or mental health-related ED visits. Mental health service use among homecare patients with schizophrenia spectrum and other psychotic disorders was low. While Francophones had a higher hospitalization rate than Anglophones, language was otherwise not associated with mental health service use.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".