The CHAT project: paediatricians and mental health clinicians: working together for the sake of the children.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The Shared Care model, originally developed to address the paucity of adult mental health resources, has potential applicability to the design and delivery of mental health services for children and youth. With a similar prevalence of mental illness and more difficulty accessing mental health care than adults, Canadian children and youth have been even less well served than their parents. As there is a significant overlap in the types of health concerns for which children and youth are seen by mental health clinicians and paediatricians, building improved collaboration between these groups is an obvious, though under-utilized, method of enhancing mental health care for this population. The CHAT project was a one year collaboration involving three different types of collaborative activities between mental health clinicians and paediatricians. METHODS: Out-patient mental health clinicians and community paediatricians were surveyed about their educational needs and interests. A community paediatrician joined an outpatient mental health care team, continuing professional educational activities were provided by each group for the other and were evaluated. RESULTS: The paediatrician's participation was evaluated positively by team members. Eighty-three percent of mental health clinicians (n=10) rated the educational sessions positively and 77.8% (n=7) noted increased knowledge. Paediatricians expressed strong interest in having more mental health-related educational activities. CONCLUSION: This small project provided opportunities for useful exchanges between mental health clinicians and community paediatricians and preliminary evidence that shared care initiatives for children and youth should be further researched.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.023 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".