MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2044989371 · doi:10.1258/jtt.2008.008001

Telehealth: a child and family-friendly approach to mental health-care reform

2008· review· en· W2044989371 on OpenAlexaff
Patricia Lingley‐Pottie, Patrick J. McGrath

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Telemedicine and Telecare · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAttachment and Relationship Dynamics
Canadian institutionsIzaak Walton Killam Health CentreDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTelehealthMental healthAttritionApprehensionMedicineTelepsychiatryNursingAllianceHealth carePsychologyPsychiatryTelemedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Limited access to paediatric mental health services and high drop-out rates from treatment result in poor health outcomes for families with children with mental health problems. New ways of delivering care are required. Telehealth is a promising approach. The Family Help programme employs manualized, distance treatment by telephone. Participants in the Family Help programme (both adults and children) have reported a strong therapeutic alliance with their telephone coach. Participants also described how during treatment sessions they felt comfortable and safe in their own home; they did not feel stigmatized or judged; they had little apprehension about self-disclosure and they felt that treatment was delivered at their convenience. Treatment calls were often scheduled after typical working hours. Attrition rates were found to be very low and children actively engaged in the structured, distance treatment. Evidence-based, distance delivery using non-professionals is a promising approach to the delivery of paediatric mental health care.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.375 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations29
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Telemedicine and TelecareSame topicAttachment and Relationship DynamicsFrench-language works237,207