MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2559853165 · doi:10.1186/s12888-016-1145-6

A controlled trial of implementing a complex mental health intervention for carers of vulnerable young people living in out-of-home care: the ripple project

2016· article· en· W2559853165 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Helen Herrman, Cathy Humphreys, Stephen Halperin, Katherine Monson, Carol Harvey, Cathrine Mihalopoulos, Penelope Fay Mitchell, Tony Glynn, Anne Magnus, Lenice Murray, Josef Szwarc, Elise Davis, Sophie S. Havighurst, Patrick D. McGorry, Sam Tyano, Ida Kaplan, Simon Rice, Kristen Moeller‐Saxone

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Psychiatry · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChild Welfare and Adoption
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Health and Medical Research CouncilDepartment of Health, State Government of VictoriaUniversity of TorontoUniversity of MelbourneMedical Research CouncilAustralian Rotary HealthOntario Centre of Excellence for Child and Youth Mental HealthDeakin UniversityU.S. Department of Health and Human Services
KeywordsMental healthIntervention (counseling)NeglectPsychological interventionMedicinePopulationSocial workNursingPsychiatryPsychologyEnvironmental healthPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Out-of-home care (OoHC) refers to young people removed from their families by the state because of abuse, neglect or other adversities. Many of the young people experience poor mental health and social function before, during and after leaving care. Rigorously evaluated interventions are urgently required. This publication describes the protocol for the Ripple project and notes early findings from a controlled trial demonstrating the feasibility of the work. The Ripple project is implementing and evaluating a complex mental health intervention that aims to strengthen the therapeutic capacities of carers and case managers of young people (12-17 years) in OoHC. METHODS: The study is conducted in partnership with mental health, substance abuse and social services in Melbourne, with young people as participants. It has three parts: 1. Needs assessment and implementation of a complex mental health intervention; 2. A 3-year controlled trial of the mental health, social and economic outcomes; and 3. Nested process evaluation of the intervention. RESULTS: Early findings characterising the young people, their carers and case managers and implementing the intervention are available. The trial Wave 1 includes interviews with 176 young people, 52% of those eligible in the study population, 104 carers and 79 case managers. CONCLUSIONS: Implementing and researching an affordable service system intervention appears feasible and likely to be applicable in other places and countries. Success of the intervention will potentially contribute to reducing mental ill-health among these young people, including suicide attempts, self-harm and substance abuse, as well as reducing homelessness, social isolation and contact with the criminal justice system. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12615000501549 . Retrospectively registered 19 May 2015.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.327 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations16
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC PsychiatrySame topicChild Welfare and AdoptionFrench-language works237,207