MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403701562 · doi:10.70256/624482cgeyyk

Provider Types and Perceived Mental Health Discrimination in Health Care Settings: Results of a Canadian Nationally Representative Sample

2023· article· en· W4403701562 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
David C. Kondrat, Jeremiah W. Jaggers, Jennifer Charles, Joseph Bartholomew

Bibliographic record

VenueBest practices in mental health · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Treatment and Access
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthSample (material)PsychologyHealth careEnvironmental healthMedicinePsychiatryPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An exploratory investigation was conducted to assess the influence of provider types on a client's perception of mental health stigmatization in a health care setting. A subsample of respondents (n = 2,323) to the Canadian Community Health Survey-Mental Health was included in the analysis. We used multiple regression to investigate the potential associations between provider types and number of providers seen for persons with mental health concerns experiencing health-care-related stigma. Seeking help from some groups was associated with increased odds of experiencing health care provider stigma. Seeing more professionals was also associated with an increased likelihood of experiencing health care provider stigma. The results clarify that individuals who experience mental illness often perceive discrimination and prejudice when seeking mental health treatment. Given the impact of stigma on treatment-seeking behavior, it is plausible that some mental health providers are contributing to the client's choice not to seek care.

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)0.002
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.407
Threshold uncertainty score0.925

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.478
Teacher spread0.378 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBest practices in mental healthSame topicMental Health Treatment and AccessFrench-language works237,207