Factors Predicting Depression across Multiple Domains in a National Longitudinal Sample of Canadian Youth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This prospective longitudinal study aimed to investigate the strength and relative importance of multiple predictors of depression in youth aged 16 to 20 years. Data were drawn from Statistics Canada's National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth (Statistics Canada 2007a, b). Hierarchical regressions were conducted separately by child gender (N = 796 boys; N = 919 girls) for two overlapping samples: mixed parent-child dyads (e.g., biological mothers, fathers and other caregivers; N = 1,715) and a subsample containing only biological mother-child dyads (N = 1,425). Parent-reported data were used from Cycle 1 when the children were aged 4 to 8 years. Parent and child-reported data were used from Cycle 4 when children were aged 10 to 14 years. The outcome measure of depressive symptoms was taken from Cycle 7 when the youth were aged 16 to 20 years. Adolescents reported more depression symptoms than young adults and girls reported more than boys. For boys, higher anxiety/depression scores at ages 4 to 8 years and 10 to 14 years, along with lower self-esteem at 10 to 14 years, predicted higher depression scores. Girls' depression was predicted by loss of a parent by ages 4 to 8 years and higher self-reported anxiety/depression and aggression at ages 10 to 14 years. Among biological mother-child dyads, maternal depression reported by mother when child was aged 4 to 8 years and 10 to 14 years significantly predicted depression for girls. At 10 to 14 years, child-reported lower parental monitoring (girls only) and greater parental rejection (boys and girls) predicted depression at ages 16 to 20 years.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".