MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2883796170 · doi:10.12927/hcq.2018.25521

The Mental Health of Adults with Developmental Disabilities in Ontario: Lessons from Administrative Health Data

2018· article· en· W2883796170 on OpenAlexaffabout
Yona Lunsky, Robert Balogh, Anna Durbin, Avra Selick, Tiziana Volpe, Elizabeth Lin

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare Quarterly · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPrimary Care and Health Outcomes
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthHealth careAddictionBest practicePsychiatryPsychologyHealth policyMental illnessPopulationMedicineNursingGerontologyPublic healthEnvironmental healthPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Adults with developmental disabilities have increased rates of mental illness and addiction, in addition to being more likely to experience physical health issues.This can lead to high rates of hospital and community-based healthcare.Population-based administrative health data can help in identifying the extent of problems experienced and target areas for policy and practice changes. The IssueMental healthcare costs total over $50 billion a year in Canada, affecting more than 6.7 million people (Mental Health Commission of Canada 2013;Ratnasingham et al. 2012).Adults with developmental disabilities (DDs) such as Down syndrome or autism have a high rate of mental health issues and face significant barriers when accessing appropriate and timely mental healthcare (Lunsky et al. 2007, Lunsky et al. 2013c).Such challenges can lead to additional problems for them and their families.There is currently no national strategy or approach for addressing the mental health needs of this population, and the training of mental healthcare professionals in the field of DDs is extremely limited.The situation is further complicated by the fact that the required services and supports for this group are spread across the health and social service sectors.Just how big an issue this is in our country is difficult to know with limited data.Up until recently, identifying persons with DDs in existing databases was not routinely done, leading to a lack of data and knowledge regarding their mental health diagnoses and mental health service use.In Ontario, we had a unique opportunity to explore mental health concerns and service utilization patterns by linking data from social services to data from health services at the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (Lin et al. 2014).This initiative, which began in 2010, is part of the Health Care Access Research and Developmental Disabilities Program (H-CARDD; https://www.porticonetwork.ca/web/hcardd),a partnership between scientists, clinicians, policy makers, patients and families.We summarize here findings from the program thus far that have important implications for mental health policy and service delivery. Key Findings Greater prevalence of mental illness and addiction

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.050
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.166

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.050
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.012
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.135
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 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

Citations16
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare QuarterlySame topicPrimary Care and Health OutcomesFrench-language works237,207