MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2160264283 · doi:10.1177/070674370505000406

A Public Health Strategy to Improve the Mental Health of Canadian Children

2005· review· en· W2160264283 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Charlotte Waddell, Kimberley L. McEwan, Cody A. Shepherd, David R. Offord, Josephine M. Hua

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicChild and Adolescent Health
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityGovernment of British ColumbiaUniversity of British Columbia
FundersHealth Canada
KeywordsMental healthNeglectPublic healthDistressPsychiatryMedicinePsychologyClinical psychologyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mental health problems are the leading health problems that Canadian children currently face after infancy. At any given time, 14% of children aged 4 to 17 years (over 800,000 in Canada) experience mental disorders that cause significant distress and impairment at home, at school, and in the community. Fewer than 25% of these children receive specialized treatment services. Without effective prevention or treatment, childhood problems often lead to distress and impairment throughout adulthood, with significant costs for society. Children's mental health has not received the public policy attention that is warranted by recent epidemiologic data. To address the neglect of children's mental health, a new national strategy is urgently needed. Here, we review the research evidence and suggest the following 4 public policy goals: promote healthy development for all children, prevent mental disorders to reduce the number of children affected, treat mental disorders more effectively to reduce distress and impairment, and monitor outcomes to ensure the effective and efficient use of public resources. Taken together, these goals constitute a public health strategy to improve the mental health of Canadian children.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.201
Threshold uncertainty score0.404

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.113
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.299 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations226
Published2005
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of PsychiatrySame topicChild and Adolescent HealthFrench-language works237,207