Evidence Supporting the Historical Context for Current Views on Unmet Need in Child and Adolescent Mental Health [P02-96]
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: In over 60 years little has changed in children's mental health and the flag waving continues: It is time for action in the trenches. It is imperative to focus health policy on the need to provide basic mental health succor to children and their families. A failure to alter the situation related to children's mental health will no doubt have catastrophic consequences for our society. We review the level of progress made in reforming regional mental health services since 2002. Methods: Using population-based representation of regional service utilization capacity permits comparison of regional, provincial and national rates of child and adolescent mental disorder. Results: Regional services in the last 6 years have served at most approximately 1% of the 0-18 year old population annually. This rate represents an increase from about 0.6% in 2002. Conclusions: Rationing the scant professional resources that exist to serve children's mental health will become increasingly difficult. For example, it is estimated that three percent of 0-18 year-olds are estimated to suffer a debilitating mental problem. Implication for policy are that our results point to service gaps in need of immediate policy development to meet basic needs of children. Several strategies are considered.
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 | 0.013 | 0.053 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.025 | 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".