MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W190274809 · doi:10.15173/m.v1i21.791

University Campus Peer Support Centres: Benefits for Student Emotional and Mental Well-Being

2012· article· en· W190274809 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Meducator · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Research Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthPeer reviewPeer supportPsychologyWell-beingApplied psychologyMedical educationEmotional well-beingMedicineClinical psychologyPsychiatryPolitical sciencePsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Within undergraduate student populations, there has been a rise in the incidence of mental health issues such as depression and anxiety. These problems have been shown to negatively impact emotional wellbeing and academic success.1 Many elements of the undergraduate experience, including stressful transitions from high school to first year, contribute to mental health problems amongst this student body. Peer support is a relatively recent resource for universities to address growing mental health concerns on campus. Peer support, which involves trained students who voluntarily provide emotional support to peers, offers a unique function to student mental health. It can be useful throughout a student’s undergraduate career and is also beneficial to those who provide the support. While it may not replace professional mental health services, it may be a significant addition to the existing student wellness support systems on university campuses today.

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.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.483
Threshold uncertainty score0.876

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.336 · 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