MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1980865100 · doi:10.1207/s15374424jccp3501_1

Closing the Research-Practice Gap: Factors Affecting Adoption and Implementation of a Children's Mental Health Program

2006· article· en· W1980865100 on OpenAlexaff
Joanna Henderson, Sherri MacKay, Michele Peterson‐Badali

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthArsonClosing (real estate)PsychologyPsychological interventionMedical educationEarly adopterApplied psychologyPsychiatryBusinessMarketingMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite the availability of effective interventions, they are not widely used in community mental health centers. This study examined the adoption and implementation of The Arson Prevention Program for Children (TAPP-C), a program for juvenile firesetters developed at a teaching hospital and disseminated to community settings. Questionnaire data from mental health professionals were used to evaluate the roles of adopter, innovation, and dissemination characteristics in TAPP-C adoption and implementation. Results indicate that different factors are important at different diffusion stages. Moreover, they suggest that innovation characteristics may be particularly important to adoption, whereas adopter and dissemination characteristics may be more influential in implementation.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.087
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.341
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.458

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0870.341
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.120
GPT teacher head0.509
Teacher spread0.389 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations90
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Child & Adolescent PsychologySame topicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207