Measuring goal progress using the goal-based outcome (GBO) measure in Youth Wellness Hubs Ontario – an integrated youth mental health service
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Problem and Context. There is a growing body of evidence indicating that the prevalence of mental health difficulties, in particular anxiety and depression, is increasing among youth, and many young people in this age group (12-25 years) do not get adequate mental health support. Recently, a global movement to transform youth mental health services is underway with the establishment of integrated youth services (IYS) that offer youth-specific care and emphasize early intervention and prevention, developmentally and culturally- informed services, community engagement, evidence-based and evidence-informed interventions, and youth and family engagement. While outcome data has an important role in enhancing the effectiveness of care for youth mental health, having young people define for themselves the area they feel should be the focus of in an intervention are also common measures used in IYS settings. Goal-setting has been used in therapy for several decades, and agreement on goals between young person and their clinician is thought to be central to successfully building a good therapeutic relationship and improving outcomes. Who is it for? Service providers, researchers, clinicians, youth and families. Who did you involve and engage with? Participants were young people (>5000) who engaged with a Youth Wellness Hub service between April 2020 and October 2022. The data for this study comprised over 15,000 goals. Youth can set up to one, two or three goals at each visit using the Goal-Based Outcome (GBO) tool. Inductive thematic analysis was employed on the types of goals set by young people. What did you do? The aim of this study was to explore the type of service goals set by young people who are engaging with integrated mental health services. The study also looked at whether services facilitated progress in goals as set by young people. What results did you get? What impact did you have? The analysis identified a number of goal-related themes related to improving mental health, reducing substance use and other addictions, improving physical health, service navigation, and self-improvement. Data from presentation to last assessment will be reviewed to examine change in progress on goals over time. What is the learning for the international audience? Understanding the clinical utility of an idiographic measure like the GBO with young people accessing community-based services is critical because the tool allows for capturing aspects of young people’s lives that are of importance to them that may not be as easily captured on standardized outcome tools. What are the next steps? Future directions include continuous learning and evaluation of the GBO in integrated care settings and examining the association between goal progress and standardize outcomes.
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,007 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».