MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406129716 · doi:10.3389/frhs.2024.1473235

Care coordination for people living with serious mental illness: understanding the caregiver's perspective

2025· article· en· W4406129716 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Pamela Obegu, Kayla Nicholls, Mary Alberti

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Health Services · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily Caregiving in Mental Illness
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)Mental illnessPsychologyPsychiatryMedicineGerontologyMental healthComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Family caregivers of people living with serious mental illness such as bipolar disorder, psychosis and schizophrenia, are continuously burdened with caregiving, following the complexities of navigating the mental health system for their loved ones. The aim of the study was to understand the perspectives of caregivers about care coordination for people living with serious mental illness, highlighting the current landscape and new directions across Canada. Methods: In this co-designed participatory qualitative research, caregivers of people living with serious mental illness, and service providers were engaged and purposively sampled across Canada. Results: The main findings of the study revealed care coordination as a key strategy to alleviate the burden of caregivers and enhance sustainable support for them. In complement with collaborative mental health care, care coordination can improve service delivery and strengthen the mental health system. Conclusion: Given the severity of bipolar disorder, psychosis and schizophrenia, it is important that we prioritize care for people living with these illnesses while providing support for their caregivers who bear the brunt of the otherwise fractured mental health system. Ultimately, collaboration between people and systems is how the mental health system can be much improved, and care coordinators serve as resourceful go-betweens in this 'collaborativerse'.

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)0.000
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.302
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.292 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Health ServicesSame topicFamily Caregiving in Mental IllnessFrench-language works237,207