患有躁郁症的社区成员对健康的关注、获得护理的机会以及对研究和研究人员的信任。

Christian Conger, Linda B Cottler
{"title":"患有躁郁症的社区成员对健康的关注、获得护理的机会以及对研究和研究人员的信任。","authors":"Christian Conger, Linda B Cottler","doi":"10.1007/s44192-024-00091-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Data are needed on differences in community-dwelling populations with bipolar disorder (BP) regarding trust in research and access to care. We characterized community members by lifetime history of bipolar disorder. We hypothesized that those with BP would have less trust in research, visit a health provider less, and participate less in research than those without BP. We also hypothesized that those with BP would be more likely to have a history of marijuana (MJ) use.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cross-sectional design was used for this analysis. The study population consisted of 12,489 members (78.0%) from the HealthStreet community engagement program who were interviewed by a Community Health Worker about health history and demographics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the sample, the rate of BP was 10.6% (n = 1326). Those reporting BP were more likely than those who did not (n = 11,163), to report muscle, bone, and mental health problems, to be younger, female, to have visited the doctor in the past 12 months, to be interested in participating in research, and be current MJ users. Trust did not differ between BP groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our analysis found that persons with BP had higher access to care and more interest in research, thus our primary hypothesis was rejected. Our secondary hypothesis, that persons with BP were more likely to have a history of MJ use was upheld. These findings are important because they address a crucial gap in the literature surrounding BP and lay the groundwork for future community-level research.</p>","PeriodicalId":72827,"journal":{"name":"Discover mental health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11387570/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Health concerns, access to care, and trust in research and researchers among community members with bipolar disorder.\",\"authors\":\"Christian Conger, Linda B Cottler\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s44192-024-00091-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Data are needed on differences in community-dwelling populations with bipolar disorder (BP) regarding trust in research and access to care. We characterized community members by lifetime history of bipolar disorder. We hypothesized that those with BP would have less trust in research, visit a health provider less, and participate less in research than those without BP. We also hypothesized that those with BP would be more likely to have a history of marijuana (MJ) use.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cross-sectional design was used for this analysis. The study population consisted of 12,489 members (78.0%) from the HealthStreet community engagement program who were interviewed by a Community Health Worker about health history and demographics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the sample, the rate of BP was 10.6% (n = 1326). Those reporting BP were more likely than those who did not (n = 11,163), to report muscle, bone, and mental health problems, to be younger, female, to have visited the doctor in the past 12 months, to be interested in participating in research, and be current MJ users. Trust did not differ between BP groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our analysis found that persons with BP had higher access to care and more interest in research, thus our primary hypothesis was rejected. Our secondary hypothesis, that persons with BP were more likely to have a history of MJ use was upheld. These findings are important because they address a crucial gap in the literature surrounding BP and lay the groundwork for future community-level research.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72827,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Discover mental health\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11387570/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Discover mental health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s44192-024-00091-4\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Discover mental health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s44192-024-00091-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:社区双相情感障碍(BP)患者在对研究的信任度和获得护理的机会方面存在差异,我们需要这方面的数据。我们根据双相情感障碍的终生病史对社区成员进行了特征描述。我们假设,与没有双相情感障碍的人相比,患有双相情感障碍的人对研究的信任度会更低,去医疗机构就诊的次数会更少,参与研究的程度也会更低。我们还假设,患有躁郁症的人更有可能有使用大麻(MJ)的历史:本分析采用横断面设计。研究对象包括 HealthStreet 社区参与计划的 12,489 名成员(78.0%),他们接受了社区保健员关于健康史和人口统计学方面的访谈:在样本中,血压高的比例为 10.6%(n = 1326)。报告血压高的人比不报告血压高的人(n = 11,163 人)更有可能报告肌肉、骨骼和精神健康问题,更年轻,更女性,在过去 12 个月中看过医生,有兴趣参与研究,并且是 MJ 的使用者。不同血压组之间的信任度没有差异:我们的分析发现,血压患者获得治疗的机会更多,对研究的兴趣更大,因此我们的主要假设被否决。我们的次要假设,即 BP 患者更有可能有使用 MJ 的历史,得到了证实。这些发现非常重要,因为它们填补了有关 BP 的文献中的一个重要空白,并为未来的社区研究奠定了基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Health concerns, access to care, and trust in research and researchers among community members with bipolar disorder.

Background: Data are needed on differences in community-dwelling populations with bipolar disorder (BP) regarding trust in research and access to care. We characterized community members by lifetime history of bipolar disorder. We hypothesized that those with BP would have less trust in research, visit a health provider less, and participate less in research than those without BP. We also hypothesized that those with BP would be more likely to have a history of marijuana (MJ) use.

Methods: A cross-sectional design was used for this analysis. The study population consisted of 12,489 members (78.0%) from the HealthStreet community engagement program who were interviewed by a Community Health Worker about health history and demographics.

Results: Among the sample, the rate of BP was 10.6% (n = 1326). Those reporting BP were more likely than those who did not (n = 11,163), to report muscle, bone, and mental health problems, to be younger, female, to have visited the doctor in the past 12 months, to be interested in participating in research, and be current MJ users. Trust did not differ between BP groups.

Conclusions: Our analysis found that persons with BP had higher access to care and more interest in research, thus our primary hypothesis was rejected. Our secondary hypothesis, that persons with BP were more likely to have a history of MJ use was upheld. These findings are important because they address a crucial gap in the literature surrounding BP and lay the groundwork for future community-level research.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Collaborative strategies for adolescent suicide prevention: insights from Slovakia and Kyrgyzstan. Mental distress and associated factors among undergraduate students: evidence from a cross-sectional study at the University of Dodoma, Tanzania. Validation of the Japanese version of the Patient Health Questionnaire-4 (PHQ-4-J) to screen for depression and anxiety. Does major make a difference? Mental health literacy and its relation to college major in a diverse sample of undergraduate students. Understanding community-based mental health interventions among migrant workers in Singapore.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1