The place of the Western Canada waitlist project in regional child and adolescent mental health program services
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Place of the Western Canada Waitlist Project in Regional Child and Adolescent Mental Health Program Services.In this presentation is described the history of the Western Canada Waitlist Project (WCWL) and its implementation within the Child and Adolescent Mental Health Program. Highlighted is how the Western Canada Waitlist Project fits into regional clinical and accountability processes. Our results confirm that the Western Canada Waitlist Project Children's Mental Health component is a useful, economic instrument. For example, 11,067 Children's Mental Health Priority Criteria Score (CMH-PCS) forms have been completed since the beginning of the project in 2002. Not only have the WCWL data been used clinically to place clients within the continuum of care and develop priority and safety flags, the WCWL data have also been used to predict and model clinical outcomes. The current paper highlights the degree to which the WCWL-CMH-PCS, gathered at the time of screening and triage, prior to admission, predicts clinical outcomes at the time of discharge. Described is the way in which we plan to use this information to flag on admission, for the purpose of additional intervention, children who are at risk of poor clinical outcomes.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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.
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".