Assessing the impacts and outcomes of youth driven mental health promotion: A mixed‐methods assessment of the Social Networking Action for Resilience study
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
Mental health challenges are the leading health issue facing youth globally. To better respond to this health challenge, experts advocate for a population health approach inclusive of mental health promotion; yet this area remains underdeveloped. Further, while there is growing emphasis on youth-engaged research and intervention design, evidence of the outcomes and impacts are lacking. The purpose of this paper is to contribute to addressing these gaps, presenting findings from the Social Networking Action for Resilience (SONAR) study, an exploration of youth-driven mental health promotion in a rural community in British Columbia, Canada. Mixed methods including pre- and post-intervention surveys (n = 175) and qualitative interviews (n = 10) captured the outcomes and impacts of the intervention on indicators of mental health, the relationship between level of engagement and benefit, and community perceptions of impact. Findings demonstrate the feasibility and benefits of youth engaged research and intervention at an individual and community-level.
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 | 0.007 | 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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