MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2230748383

Engaging children, youth and families - more than a good idea.

2010· article· fr· W2230748383 on OpenAlexaff
Jana Davidson, Keli Anderson

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2010
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicChild and Adolescent Health
Canadian institutionsBC Mental Health & Substance Use ServicesUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthGeneral partnershipFriendshipPsychologyPublic relationsSocial psychologyPolitical sciencePsychiatry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Relationships, intent, commitment and a little serendipity – the ingredients that create the magic that make the real difference toward improving the mental health of children, youth and their families. Flashback…2003…a new wet behind the ears psychiatrist and a passionate parent advocate crossed paths and unbeknownst to each it would lead to a partnership, friendship and shared desire to create a future where children, youth and their families could flourish, succeed in life and be understood and valued. Flashforward…2010…here we are co-guest editing this special issue of the Journal on engaging children, youth and families in all aspects of child and youth mental health. We have attempted to secure articles that can speak to the importance and necessity of engaging children, youth and families to inform and improve systems, policies, practices, programs and research. There is no doubt that full engagement is possible and fruitful as described by Spencer, Blau & Mallery in their article on the impact of “family-driven” care in America. As they point out there are facilitating steps which promote the success and uptake of engagement with children, youth and families. However, as Goplan et al. recognize, engaging families into mental health treatment remains a serious challenge. This is not an insurmountable hurdle; however, it is one that impedes efforts to engage when there is only so much time, limited resources and too many kids in crisis – impacting not only the families but also all those working in the systems – all of whom would benefit from the engagement. Parents and families in this country are thinking and worried about their children’s mental health. In 2009, Today's Parent Magazine published a Healthy Kids 2009 series which featured four topic areas; mental health, fitness and nutrition, environment and health, and injury prevention. As noted in Anderson et al., the Editor of the magazine stated that mental health was the most powerful of the four topics. The youth with lived experience that were engaged in developing the framework for the BC Provincial Family Council, co-chaired by a youth and a parent, stated that a primary motivator for their engagement was their worry about having children and the potential impact of their own mental health on their kids and their children’s risk of developing mental health concerns as noted in Davidson, et al. When provided an opportunity, youth and families are very frank and contribute significant energy in describing what worked, what they need and what they hope for. This is clearly evident in Chovil & Panagiotopoulos who engaged families in determining the health literacy needs related to the use of second-generation antipsychotic medications. Each article in this special issue demonstrates the importance of relationships, intent, commitment and a little serendipity. How does one achieve this? We and these authors know that these ingredients were necessary to bring about the engagement that they desired. Find other champions and be champions together. It is the magic of relationships that make possibilities real. “Real isn’t how you are made,” said the Skin Horse. “It’s a thing that happens to you.” (The Velveteen Rabbit or How Toys Become Real, Margery Williams). Guest Editors, Jana Davidson and Keli Anderson

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)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.047
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.139

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.047
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.023
Scholarly communication0.0190.039
Open science0.0030.016
Research integrity0.0140.037
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.005

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.271 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicChild and Adolescent Health→French-language works237,207→