MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2582365405 · doi:10.24095/hpcdp.36.12.02

The 2014 Survey on Living with Chronic Diseases in Canadaon Mood and Anxiety Disorders: a methodological overview

2016· article· en· W2582365405 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Siobhan O’Donnell, Ricky Cheung, Kathryn Bennett, Claudia Lagacé

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Promotion and Chronic Disease Prevention in Canada · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Treatment and Access
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityPublic Health Agency of Canada
FundersHealth CanadaAustralian GovernmentPublic Health Agency of Canada
KeywordsAnxietySampling frameMoodDescriptive statisticsMood disordersPsychologySample (material)Public healthMedicinePsychiatryClinical psychologyEnvironmental healthStatisticsPopulationNursingMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: There is a paucity of information about the impact of mood and anxiety disorders on Canadians and the approaches used to manage them. To address this gap, the 2014 Survey on Living with Chronic Diseases in Canada-Mood and Anxiety Disorders Component (SLCDC-MA) was developed. The purpose of this paper is to describe the methodology of the 2014 SLCDC-MA and examine the sociodemographic characteristics of the final sample. METHODS: The 2014 SLCDC-MA is a cross-sectional follow-up survey that includes Canadians from the 10 provinces aged 18 years and older with mood and/or anxiety disorders diagnosed by a health professional that are expected to last, or have already lasted, six months or more. The survey was developed by the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) through an iterative, consultative process with Statistics Canada and external experts. Statistics Canada performed content testing, designed the sampling frame and strategies and collected and processed the data. PHAC used descriptive analyses to describe the respondents' sociodemographic characteristics, produced nationally representative estimates using survey weights provided by Statistics Canada, and generated variance estimates using bootstrap methodology. RESULTS: The final 2014 SLCDC-MA sample consists of a total of 3361 respondents (68.9% response rate). Among Canadian adults with mood and/or anxiety disorders, close to twothirds (64%) were female, over half (56%) were married/in a common-law relationship and 60% obtained a post-secondary education. Most were young or middle-aged (85%), Canadian born (88%), of non-Aboriginal status (95%), and resided in an urban setting (82%). Household income was fairly evenly distributed between the adequacy quintiles; however, individuals were more likely to report a household income adequacy within the lowest (23%) versus highest (17%) quintile. Forty-five percent reported having a mood disorder only, 24% an anxiety disorder only and 31% both kinds of disorder. CONCLUSION: The 2014 SLCDC-MA is the only national household survey to collect information on the experiences of Canadians living with a professionally diagnosed mood and/or anxiety disorder. The information collected offers insights into areas where additional support or interventions may be needed and provides baseline information for future public health research in the area of mental illness.

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)0.028
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.972
Threshold uncertainty score0.546

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0280.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0100.021
Science and technology studies0.0060.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.319 · 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.

Study designObservational
DomainMethods
GenreMethods

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
Published2016
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Promotion and Chronic Disease Prevention in CanadaSame topicMental Health Treatment and AccessFrench-language works237,207