As noted by Hammer and colleagues (2024), “the IBM-HS seeks to maximize users’ ability to measure which constructs predict help-seeking intention and prospective behavior at a particular moment in time, at the expense of capturing the iterative complexity of the mental health care journey. Likewise, to maintain parsimony, this version of the IBM-HS offers more precise theorizing regarding the constructs proximal to prospective help-seeking behavior and less precision around the distal effects (i.e., interrelations among determinants). Finally, there are certain popular help-seeking constructs (e.g., stigma) that, due to the nature of the reasoned action tradition, are operationalized across multiple constructs in the IBM-HS (e.g., structural forces, outcome beliefs, experiential beliefs, beliefs about others’ expectations), which increase the challenge of seamlessly integrating those constructs into the IBM-HS.” (p. 10).