MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2333511526 · doi:10.1097/yco.0000000000000076

Prevention of common mental disorders

2014· review· en· W2333511526 on OpenAlexaff
Carl D’Arcy, Xiangfei Meng

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Psychiatry · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsRoyal University HospitalUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionMental healthMedicineMental illnessTollPsychiatryDiseasePopulationPsychologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Mental disorders take a major toll, economically, socially, and psychologically, on individuals, families, and societies. Prevention provides an important and realistic opportunity to overcome this major health problem. This review outlines a conceptual framework for mental health prevention and effective strategies and programs for the prevention of mental disorders. RECENT FINDINGS: Risk and protective factors for mental illness provide leverage points for prevention interventions. A life course perspective, looking at disease from conception, pregnancy, parenting, infancy, childhood, adolescence, adulthood to aging, emphasizes the importance of targeting prevention efforts as early as possible in life. Currently available effective and realistic preventions targeting major phases of life including both universal (community) and selective high-risk approaches are noted. The Internet and its associated technologies are seen to have great potential for prevention. SUMMARY: Common mental disorders are preventable, and prevention is cost-effective. Although the evidence base for the prevention of mental disorders needs to be expanded with rigorous large-scale pragmatic trials of promising effective programs, we have at our disposal strong evidence and effective tools on which to base prevention efforts. These facts need to be fully communicated to providers, policy makers, and the population at large, and acted upon.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.897
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.108
GPT teacher head0.515
Teacher spread0.407 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations15
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in PsychiatrySame topicDigital Mental Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207