Missed opportunities: mental disorder in children of parents with depression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Emerging evidence suggests that early intervention and prevention programmes for mental health problems in the offspring of parents with depression are important. Such programmes are difficult to implement if children with psychiatric disorder are not identified and are not accessing services, even if their parents are known to primary care. AIM: To investigate service use in children of parents who have recurrent depression, and factors that influence such contact. DESIGN AND SETTING: A total of 333 families were recruited, mainly through primary health care, in which at least one parent had received treatment for recurrent depression and had a child aged 9-17 years. METHOD: Psychiatric assessments of parents and children were completed using research diagnostic interviews. The service-use interview recorded current (in the 3 months prior to interview) and lifetime contact with health, educational, and social services due to concerns about the child's emotions or behaviour. RESULTS: Only 37% of children who met criteria for psychiatric disorder were in contact with any service at the time of interview. A third, who were suicidal or self-harming and had a psychiatric disorder at that time, were not in contact with any service. Lack of parental worry predicted lower service use, with higher rates in children with comorbidity and suicidality. CONCLUSION: Most children with a psychiatric disorder in this high-risk sample were not in contact with services. Improving ease of access to services, increasing parental and professional awareness that mental health problems can cluster in families, and improving links between adult and child services may help early detection and intervention strategies for the offspring of parents with depression.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".