Thought Spot: Co-Creating Mental Health Solutions with Post-Secondary Students
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is difficult for the nearly 20% of Canadian 15- to 24-year olds reporting symptoms to seek the help they need within the current mental health system. Web-based and mobile health interventions are promising tools for reaching this group; having the capacity to reduce access-to-service barriers and engage youth in promoting their mental well-being. A three-phased, iterative, co-creation developmental approach was used to develop Thought Spot, a platform to better enable post-secondary students to seek mental health support. Co-creation activities included student development teams, hosting a hackathon, conducting focus groups and evidence-based workshops and student advisory groups. Evaluation results highlighted the need for greater role clarity and strategies for sustainable engagement in the co-creation process. Lessons learned are informing the project optimization phase and will be utilized to inform the design and implementation of an RCT, assessing impact on help seeking behaviour.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it