MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Not in employment, education or training: Mental health, substance use, and disengagement in a multi-sectoral sample of service-seeking Canadian youth

2017· article· en· W2588947541 on OpenAlexaffabout
Joanna Henderson, Lisa D. Hawke, Gloria Chaim

Bibliographic record

VenueChildren and Youth Services Review · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEmployment and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychosocialMental healthPopularityPsychologyService (business)Sample (material)Quarter (Canadian coin)PsychiatryBusinessSocial psychologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Youth who are not engaged in employment, education or training (NEET) face multiple health, economic and psychosocial challenges. Despite the popularity of the NEET metric internationally, there is a paucity of research describing Canadian NEET youth. The proportion of NEET youth aged 12 to 24 presenting for services across multiple service sectors in Canada was examined. Their sociodemographic characteristics and mental health concerns were compared with those of their non-NEET peers. Over a quarter of youth were NEET, and they presented for services across all sectors. NEET youth showed multiple psychosocial risk factors. They were also more likely to endorse substance use and crime/violence concerns than their non-NEET service-seeking counterparts. Gender-based differences were observed. Since many youth presenting for services across sectors are NEET, youth-serving agencies should be prepared to offer a wide range of services to address their diverse needs. Implications for systematic screening and integrated service provision are discussed.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.299
Threshold uncertainty score0.750

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.210
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations95
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChildren and Youth Services ReviewSame topicEmployment and Welfare StudiesFrench-language works237,207