MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1976061733 · doi:10.1155/2012/739616

Examining the Factors Associated with Paid Employment of Clients Enrolled in First Episode of Psychosis Programs

2012· article· en· W1976061733 on OpenAlexafffund
Carolyn S. Dewa, Lucy Trojanowski, Chiachen Cheng, Desmond Loong

Bibliographic record

VenueSchizophrenia Research and Treatment · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsCanadian Mental Health AssociationUniversity of Toronto
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchOntario Mental Health FoundationOntario Ministry of Health and Long-Term CarePublic Health Agency of CanadaCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
KeywordsReceiptPsychosocialSocioeconomic statusEducational attainmentPsychosisMedicineSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)PsychiatryClinical psychologyPsychologyPopulationEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Schizophrenia is one of the most debilitating mental disorders. For a significant portion of individuals who suffer from this disorder, onset occurs in young adulthood, arresting important social and educational development that is necessary for future successful labor force participation. The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the literature about clients enrolled in first episode psychosis programs and psychosocial outcomes by examining the factors associated with paid employment among young adults who have experienced their first psychotic episodes. In this paper, we consider the association of socioeconomic factors to employment. Our results suggest that in addition to treatment, socioeconomic factors such as receipt of public disability benefits and educational attainment are associated with employment status. These results can help to inform future directions for the enhancement of psychosocial programs in FEP models to promote paid employment.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.653

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.142
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations10
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSchizophrenia Research and TreatmentSame topicSchizophrenia research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207