The State of Child and Youth Mental Health in Canada: Past Problems and Future Fantasies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Berezin (1978), a geriatric psychiatrist from Harvard, says that as we get older, our personality does not change, it just gets more so!How can it be then, that in 2010, despite the best efforts of many, the state of child and youth mental health in Canada is unknown to countless people?How can it be that despite the fact that nothing has changed for years, except to get more so, few know about the plight of Canadian child and youth mental health services?How can it be that in Ontario, politicians, regardless of political party (all parties have been in power at some time during the past 20 years), have known the facts about child and youth mental health and have effectively turned a blind eye?It is a shameful state of affairs that makes one wonder how much our society really cares about the well-being of our children and youth.There is too much meaningless rhetoric, especially from politicians: "Our children and youth are our future!"This is talk that has never been walked.And, yet, if we were to make the relatively modest financial investments required to ensure that the physical and mental health of our children and youth were as good as possible, we would have a much better chance of maximizing their potential, of reducing stress in their lives and their families, of optimizing their life trajectory, of improving the calibre of the workforce in Canada and, ultimately, of improving the physical and mental health among the Canadian population as a whole.It makes imminent good sense; yet, our leaders continue to turn a blind eye!Perhaps it is because improving the health of our children and youth will take many years, whereas politicians often focus on their brief tenure and securing their next term of office.As well, children and youth simply do not have a vote.Recently, in Ontario, there has been a considerable focus on mental health and addictions across the lifespan.Essentially, there are two initiatives simultaneously under way (not necessarily matching up, although the recommendations are similar in several areas).The first derives from the recently released report of the Select Committee on Mental Health and Addictions (Legislative Assembly of Ontario 2010).This committee is made up of members of all political parties.In essence, the committee endorses what many of us have said for years.There is no system of mental health services across the lifespan in Ontario; the committee recommends that all mental health services (including child and youth services) be funded out of the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care (MOHLTC) and that there be an overarching agency similar to Cancer Care Ontario to implement the mental health strategy for the province.The mission for the proposed Mental Health and Addictions Ontario is to reduce the burden of mental illness and addictions by ensuring that all Ontario residents have timely and equitable access to an integrated system of excellent, coordinated and efficient promotion, prevention, early intervention, treatment and community support programs.MOHLTC has simultaneously been working on a 10-year mental health addictions strategy titled Every Door The State of Child and Youth Mental Health in Canada:where we are and where we need to be Past Problems and Future Fantasies
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 | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.032 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.013 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".