MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2199901682 · doi:10.1177/2167696815601548

Youth Perspectives on the Transition to Adulthood

2015· article· en· W2199901682 on OpenAlexafffund
Ilana Goodman, Joanna Henderson, Michele Peterson‐Badali, Abby L. Goldstein

Bibliographic record

VenueEmerging Adulthood · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAdolescent and Pediatric Healthcare
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
KeywordsPsychologyMental healthSubstance useYoung adultDevelopmental psychologySubstance abuseAdult developmentTransition (genetics)Qualitative researchClinical psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Emerging adults with problematic substance use face many transition challenges and risks for long-term health, mental health, and substance use problems. Yet current research on how these youth view their adulthood transition is scarce. Using qualitative data gathered from semistructured interviews with 31 emerging adults seeking substance abuse treatment, we sought to (1) explore how these youth conceptualize their adulthood transition and (2) investigate their perceived interrelationships between substance use and developmental status. Youth identified adulthood criteria as including increased independence, role transitions, interdependence, and norm compliance. Participants also described the influence of substance use on their pathway toward adulthood and included issues related to substance use and mental health as adulthood criteria. Notably, substance use was described as affecting achievement of adulthood through three main processes: interfering with completion of developmental tasks, legitimizing delays in maturation, and promoting maturation through self-reflection. The findings provide important insights for service provision.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.102
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations10
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEmerging AdulthoodSame topicAdolescent and Pediatric HealthcareFrench-language works237,207