MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2765733764

Examining the Needs of Crossover Youth: Individual and System Level Factors

2017· dissertation· en· W2765733764 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Marcia Anne Gordeyko

Notice bibliographique

RevueTSpace (University of Toronto) · 2017
Typedissertation
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueChild Welfare and Adoption
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésCrossoverPsychologyComputer scienceArtificial intelligence
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Examining the Needs of Crossover Youth: Individual and System Level Factors, 2017\nMarcia A. Gordeyko\nDepartment of Applied Psychology and Human Development\nUniversity of Toronto\nAbstract\nObjective. Crossover youth are broadly defined as youth who have had contact with both the child welfare and youth justice systems. Although there has been increased research on crossover youth, including the numerous negative outcomes they experience (e.g., high rates of recidivism, multiple out-of-home placements; Herz, Ryan, Bilchik, 2010), much of this research has been based on data drawn from large child welfare and youth justice administrative databases. This approach may limit our understanding of crossover youth in other domains in which they also experience difficulties (e.g., mental health and substance use), as well as limit our understanding of these youth from a variety of perspectives (e.g., community service providers). Given that high rates of mental health and substance use difficulties are of concern for crossover youth (Turpel-Lafond Kendall, 2009), we need more specific information on their mental health needs, how these needs are met, and how service providers conceptualize the needs of crossover youth. To begin to address these questions, the two papers that make up my dissertation examined the mental health needs of crossover youth and service providers’ perspectives on those needs, respectively. Paper 1. The first part of this paper examined whether crossover youth have unique mental health symptomatology (in terms of symptom type and/or severity) compared to their peers involved in a single-system (i.e., youth justice or child welfare alone) and their non-system-involved peers. Part two examined whether youth system involvement and symptom presentation predicted receipt of mental health services. To address these questions, 389 youth in Grades 7 to 10 were recruited from school boards and mental health agencies across Ontario, Canada to complete self-report surveys. Crossover youth had the highest rates of all types of mental health symptoms and a significantly higher rate of externalizing symptoms compared to child welfare and non-system-involved youth. With respect to service receipt, findings are discussed in terms of the differential impact of internalizing versus externalizing symptoms, as well as system-level barriers. Paper 2. The aim of the second paper was to gather information on service providers’ perspectives on crossover youth, their needs, and the barriers they may face while navigating various systems. Semi-structured interview data from 10 service providers from multiple service domains (e.g., mental health, child welfare, housing) resulted in the following five themes grounded in the data: 1) crossover youth have unique experiences and needs that make them a distinguishable group; 2) family struggles – particularly difficulties with relational connectedness or attachment – impact crossover youth as they move through various systems; 3) crossover youth struggle to engage in positive relationships with others (e.g., peers and service providers); 4) crossover youth require multiple services across multiple service domains; and 5) crossover youth face numerous barriers in having their needs met, which are exacerbated by the behavioral and relational difficulties they experience. These findings exemplified that crossover youth are impacted by both individual factors (e.g., behavioral and relational difficulties) and system level factors (e.g., multiple service providers), which interact to create further challenges for crossover youth. These themes, along with previous research, were used to create an exploratory model encompassing the experiences of crossover youth at the individual and system levels, with the aim of providing a more holistic perspective on the needs of crossover youth as well as stimulating future research. Conclusions. Together, the findings from both papers highlight the importance of continued research that broadens our understanding of crossover youth beyond their experiences and outcomes in the child welfare and youth justice systems. To help inform the development of effective treatment programs and prevent negative outcomes, a more in-depth exploration is required of individual factors (particularly behavioral and relational difficulties), system level factors, and how these factors may interact to exacerbate negative outcomes for crossover youth.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: Qualitatif
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,443
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,753

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,073
Tête enseignante GPT0,286
Écart entre enseignants0,214 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeQualitatif
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2017
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueTSpace (University of Toronto)Même sujetChild Welfare and AdoptionTravaux en français237 207