Gaps and gains in parents’ mental health literacy: A cross-cultural comparison on attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to compare the knowledge and beliefs about attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) between first-generation Chinese Canadian and European Canadian parents, and to evaluate the efficacy of an existing translated ADHD information resource to improve their ADHD literacy. A community sample of 28 first-generation Chinese Canadian and 28 European Canadian parents of elementary school-aged children completed questionnaires measuring ADHD knowledge, treatment attitudes and perceived stigma, both before and after reading an informational pamphlet about ADHD. Compared with European Canadian parents, Chinese Canadian parents initially had less knowledge and more stigma about ADHD but had greater increases in knowledge and medication acceptability after passive psychoeducation. For both groups, passive psychoeducation increased ADHD stigma, but did not impact the already high acceptability for parent training intervention. Passive psychoeducation can improve mental health literacy among ethnic minority groups, but further work needs to tailor resources to address specific gaps in mental health literacy and recognize the need for concurrent stigma-reduction methods.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".