MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2418381830

Addressing the determinants of child mental health: intersectionality as a guide to primary health care renewal.

2010· article· en· W2418381830 on OpenAlexaff
Charmaine McPherson, Elizabeth McGibbon

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicChild and Adolescent Health
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntersectionalityMental healthSocial determinants of healthHealth policySociologyRace and healthHealth equityIdentity (music)PsychologyPublic healthGender studiesMedicineNursingPsychiatry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Primary health care (PHC) renewal was designed explicitly to attend to the multidimensional factors impacting on health, including the social determinants of health. These determinants are central considerations in the development of integrated, cross-sectoral, and multi-jurisdictional policies such as those that inform models of shared mental health care for children. However, there are complex theoretical challenges in translating these multidimensional issues into policy. One of these is the rarely discussed interrelationships among the social determinants of health and identities such as race, gender, age, sexuality, and social class within the added confluence of geographic contexts. An intersectionality lens is used to examine the complex interrelationships among the factors affecting child mental health and the associated policy challenges surrounding PHC renewal. The authors argue that an understanding of the intersections of social determinants of health, identity, and geography is pivotal in guiding policy-makers as they address child mental health inequities using a PHC renewal agenda.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.089

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0070.021
Scholarly communication0.0110.012
Open science0.0040.016
Research integrity0.0080.017
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.344 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicChild and Adolescent HealthFrench-language works237,207