MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2894094358 · doi:10.1123/jcsp.2018-0052

The Level of Mental Health Literacy Among Athletic Staff in Intercollegiate Sport

2018· article· en· W2894094358 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Sport Psychology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAthletic Training and Education
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental health literacyMental healthPsychologyAthletesContext (archaeology)Affect (linguistics)PopulationClinical psychologyHealth literacyPsychiatryMedicinePhysical therapyHealth careMental illnessEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mental health literacy (MHL), the knowledge and attitudes that aid in recognition, management and prevention of mental health issues, could help maintain positive mental health within the athletic community. As coaches and athletic therapists (ATs) frequently and routinely interact with athletes, this study focused on the MHL of these individuals. Eighty participants (24 females, 54 males; 57 coaches, 18 ATs) completed an on-line version of the MHL Scale. Average MHL score was 131.48, which, is relatively equal to scores seen in university students and a general population. No significant difference was detected between coaches and ATs but females reported significantly higher MHL scores than males. There was a significant negative correlation between MHL and total experience. These results have potentially strong clinical ramifications as increased MHL in this context can affect facilitators and barriers towards seeking help in a high-risk population.

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 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)0.010
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 score0.123
Threshold uncertainty score0.605

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.311
GPT teacher head0.616
Teacher spread0.305 · 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