MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2300226987 · doi:10.3109/01612840.2015.1119220

Unearthing the Theoretical Underpinnings of “Green Care” in Mental Health and Substance Misuse Care: Theoretical Underpinnings and Contemporary Clinical Examples

2016· article· en· W2300226987 on OpenAlexaff
John R. Cutcliffe, Rodger Travale

Bibliographic record

VenueIssues in Mental Health Nursing · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Green Space and Health
Canadian institutionsPositive Living North
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthPsychologySubstance misuseSubstance useMental health carePsychiatryHealth carePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The concept of "Green Care" can increasingly be found in mental health and addictions literature and some Psychiatric/Mental Health Nurses are practicing in facilities that base their approach on some or all of the underpinning theoretical elements of Green Care. However, Green Care is not yet widely considered to be part of mainstream psychiatry. Unearthing and articulating its theoretical underpinnings and clinical applications may further advance its legitimacy. Accordingly, this article identifies four principal theoretical elements of Green Care: Connectedness; Contact with Nature; Benefits of Exercise; and Occupation/Work as Therapeutic, each of which is explored and articulated by drawing on relevant literature.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.226
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.005
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.333 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations17
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIssues in Mental Health NursingSame topicUrban Green Space and HealthFrench-language works237,207