Mental Health Screening in Juvenile Justice Settings: Evaluating the Utility of the Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument, Version 2
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Allocating limited mental health resources is a challenge for juvenile justice facilities. We evaluated the clinical utility of the Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument, Version 2 (MAYSI-2)—an instrument designed to aid in this process—in three subsamples of justice-involved youth (ages 14-17): detained girls ( n = 69), detained boys ( n = 130), and incarcerated boys ( n = 373). For perspective, we compared its performance (in the incarcerated subsample) to that of the Youth Self-Report (YSR), a more widely-used screen. The MAYSI-2 subscales were moderately useful for detecting relevant diagnoses, and differences were observed across samples. However, as a general mental health screen, the MAYSI-2 performed well (and comparably to the YSR), correctly classifying 66% to 75% of youth. When used to differentiate youth with any and without any disorder, both instruments were effective. Given the MAYSI-2’s practical advantages over the YSR (lower cost, easier administration), it may be a better option for juvenile facilities.
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 | 0.014 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".