Mistreatment of Vulnerable Adults: A Conceptual Analysis of the Help-Seeking Process
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This conceptual analysis aims to clarify the notion of help-seeking in the context of abuse among vulnerable adults. In Quebec, Law 6.3 was introduced in 2017 to protect older adults and vulnerable adults who experience mistreatment. While this legislation marks a significant step forward, the detection of mistreatment remains challenging, and it continues to represent a major public health concern. Using Walker and Avant's method, this analysis establishes an operational definition of help-seeking in the context of mistreatment. An initial search across multiple databases (CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Social Science Abstracts, and Érudit) identified 6,483 references, after the exclusion of duplicates. The titles and abstracts of the selected references were then evaluated based on the previously established inclusion criteria, resulting in 262 references selected for full-text review. At the end of the process, 79 studies were retained. The results of these studies reveal that help-seeking in the context of abuse is a multidimensional process influenced by cultural, relational, and personal factors. The process of seeking help is complex and involves overcoming numerous internal and external barriers. The study concludes that a nuanced understanding of help-seeking is crucial to effectively evaluate an individual's capacity to seek and obtain assistance, as required by Quebec's Law 6.3. It further recommends the development of specialized tools and continuous professional training to improve intervention practices and support the effective implementation of the law.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".