The Feasibility of a Mental Health Curriculum in Elementary School
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To establish the feasibility and short-term impact of implementing a novel curriculum in a linguistically and geographically isolated francophone community to enhance elementary schoolchildren's (Grades 1 to 7; n = 158) knowledge and attitudes regarding mental health. METHODS: The project team developed a curriculum that covered expected emotional development, depression, anxiety disorders, and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder to be delivered by the school's usual teachers. Committee members led focused discussions (Grades 1 to 7) and administered evaluation questionnaires (Grades 4 to 7) surveying students' knowledge and attitudes before and after implementation. RESULTS: Teachers were enthusiastic about the project. Parents were initially skeptical, but post hoc interventions by school staff secured participation consent for 98% of the students. Baseline data (Grades 4 to 7) revealed little knowledge and some negative attitudes regarding mental illnesses; postprogram data indicated improved knowledge and suggested improved attitudes. CONCLUSIONS: The project was made feasible by the high degree of involvement of local community members. Children's (Grades 4 to 7) mental health awareness and understanding was enhanced by the curriculum. Effects on help-seeking behaviour and case identification have yet to be assessed.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".