An occupational perspective of youth positive mental health: A critical review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction The experience of youth positive mental health has attracted limited research interest, despite healthcare shifting to a preventative approach, promoting health and wellbeing rather than focusing on illness. The aim of this critical review was to develop an understanding of youth positive mental health from an occupational perspective. Method Eight databases were searched and findings from each of the 11 relevant studies were critically reviewed and analysed using the Canadian Model of Occupational Performance and Engagement (CMOP-E). The three core elements of the CMOP-E were used as themes: personal factors, environment and occupation. Findings Each of the core components of the CMOP-E were identified as influencing youth positive mental health. The importance of supportive social environments and social occupations were particularly prevalent. Deeper understandings of the influence spirituality and institutional environments have on positive mental health for youth are required. Conclusion Youth positive mental health is a complex concept and requires the consideration of personal, environmental and occupational factors. Gaps identified included limited evidence of how young people engaged in mental health services perceive positive mental health. To gain a deeper understanding of positive youth mental health, future research needs to be conducted to obtain the perspective of young people.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".