The Mental Health of Canadians With Self-Reported Learning Disabilities
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There has been growing concern as to the mental health status of persons with learning disabilities (PWLD). This study examined rates of mental health problems among PWLD aged 15 to 44 years using a large, nationally representative data set. PWLD were more than twice as likely to report high levels of distress, depression, anxiety disorders, suicidal thoughts, visits to mental health professionals, and poorer overall mental health than were persons without disabilities (PWOD). Multivariate regression analyses determined that these significantly higher rates of mental health problems remained for all six measures after controlling for confounding factors including income, education, social support, and physical health. Differences found in the older adult sample (ages 30-44) were even larger than in the adolescent sample (ages 15-21) for suicidal thoughts, depression, and distress. Males with learning disabilities were more likely to report depressive episodes, anxiety disorders, and consultations with health professionals, whereas females with learning disabilities were more likely to report high distress, suicidal thoughts, and poor general mental health relative to PWOD. On balance, learning disabilities were not found to be more detrimental to mental health for one gender or the other.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 it