Experiences of barriers and facilitators in mental health care transitions: A qualitative exploration of perspectives from transitional-aged youth, family, and service providers (part 1)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Transitional-aged youth (TAY) are at a vulnerable stage of their development in which mental health and/or addiction (MHA) issues tend to manifest and/or increase in severity. TAY also tend to find themselves subject to multiple care transitions, often resulting in sub-optimal access to MHA services. The objective of this study was to explore the perspectives of TAY, family members, and system providers regarding the supports needed by TAY and their families during transitions through MHA care. Methods: This is a descriptive qualitative study of TAY, family, and provider perspectives on their experiences with accessing/providing MHA care and transition supports for TAY. Focus groups and interviews were conducted with 14 TAY, 26 family members, and 23 service providers. Participants were asked about their experiences with regard to barriers and facilitators to transitions in care for TAY with MHA concerns. Data was analyzed utilizing a thematic analysis approach. Results: Six themes emerged during data analysis: pathways to care, appropriate and comprehensive care, continuity of care, informed care, family involvement, and TAY involvement. These results provide a better understanding of the needs of TAY and their families in relation to accessing and transitioning through MHA system supports and improving MHA outcomes. They also include the views of service providers on the current state of access to and transitions through MHA care, specifically for the TAY population. Discussion: This information reveals the supports needed by TAY and their families along with the challenges created due to a lack of guidance, transition preparation, collaboration, and continuity in the MHA system. MHA providers working with TAY and families can utilize these findings to promote effective TAY and family engagement for positive transitions and care experiences.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".