MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Factors influencing child mental health: A state‐wide survey of Victorian children

2012· article· en· W1759985364 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Sharon Goldfeld, Linda Hayes

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Paediatrics and Child Health · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersState Government of VictoriaMcMaster University
KeywordsMental healthMedicineResidenceNeighbourhood (mathematics)Odds ratioPopulationPsychiatryDemographyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: This study aims to estimate the prevalence of mental health problems among Victorian children and to investigate factors associated with poorer mental health. METHOD: Computer-assisted telephone interviews were undertaken with the parents of 3370 randomly selected Victorian children aged 4 to 12 years. They reported on their child's mental health and special health-care needs as well as their own mental health, family functioning and a range of community and socio-demographic variables. Population estimates and odds ratios (OR) were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). RESULTS: Overall, 11.6% (95% CI = 10.3-12.9%) of Victorian children were estimated to be at risk of having mental health problems. Factors independently placing children at increased risk of mental health problems that were 'of concern' include a child having special health-care needs (OR = 7.89, 95% CI 5.16 to 12.08), unhealthy family functioning (OR = 3.84, 95% CI 2.19 to 6.74), parental mental health problems (OR = 7.89, 95% CI 5.16 to 12.08), neighbourhood safety (OR = 2.47, 95% CI 1.20 to 5.07) and area of residence (OR = 2.01, 95% CI 1.33 to 3.02). CONCLUSIONS: A significant proportion of Victorian children are at some risk of mental health problems. These limited but important predictors of children's mental health reinforce the need for policy solutions that will extend beyond those offered by traditional mental health service systems.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.680

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.279 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Paediatrics and Child HealthSame topicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207