Social and demographic predictors of parental consultation for child psychological difficulties
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Results from previous studies examining determinants of parental consultation for child mental health provide inconsistent evidence concerning socio-demographic predictors. The aim of this study is to identify the sociodemographic predictors of parental consultation for child psychological difficulties. METHOD: An epidemiological cross-sectional analysis was carried out using a sample of 5,913 children aged between 4 and 15 years from the Health Survey for England. The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) was the measure of child psychological morbidity. RESULTS: Parents of children with psychological difficulties were less likely to seek a consultation if their child was a girl, as household income decreased or if the head of household came from manual social class. In contrast, parents were more likely to seek a consultation if they were in receipt of a benefit than if they were not in receipt of a benefit. Age of child and family type did not predict parental consultation. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this analysis confirm that a substantial proportion of children with mental health difficulties in the general population (42 per cent) have not been seen by a professional, and these are likely to be girls and children in low-income families, indicating a significant unmet need for services across the nation. These results suggest that parents and health professionals should be made more aware of the symptoms of psychological problems in girls and that services need to be planned in a way that improves uptake by low-income parents.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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".