Planning Adolescent Mental Health Promotion Programming in Saskatoon
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We assessed associations between key demographic risk factors and the outcome of depressed mood in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, to inform the planning and implementation of mental health promotion programming in schools. METHODS: In the 2008/2009 school year, 3958 students from grades 5 through 8 from 76 elementary schools completed questions regarding depressed mood on the Student Health Survey administered by the Saskatoon Health Region. The demographic risk factors for depressed mood considered in this study included age, sex, cultural status, and neighborhood income, as well as the role of school and age cohorts or grades within schools. RESULTS: We found Aboriginal students were significantly more likely to report moderate/severe depressed mood than other students. We also found older female adolescents were significantly more likely to report moderate/severe depressed mood. Neighborhood income explained the largest proportion (40%) of depressed mood differences between schools. CONCLUSIONS: These results can inform the planning and implementation of mental health promotion programming by the health sector in Saskatoon's elementary schools, including an appropriate balance between targeted and population-based interventions that address both the distal and proximal determinants of depressed mood in adolescents.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".