Resource Intensity for Children and Youth: The Development of an Algorithm to Identify High Service Users in Children’s Mental Health
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
Children's mental health care plays a vital role in many social, health care, and education systems, but there is evidence that appropriate targeting strategies are needed to allocate limited mental health care resources effectively. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a methodology for identifying children who require access to more intense facility-based or community resources. Ontario data based on the interRAI Child and Youth Mental Health instruments were analysed to identify predictors of service complexity in children's mental health. The Resource Intensity for Children and Youth (RIChY) algorithm was a good predictor of service complexity in the derivation sample. The algorithm was validated with additional data from 61 agencies. The RIChY algorithm provides a psychometrically sound decision-support tool that may be used to inform the choices related to allocation of children's mental health resources and prioritisation of clients needing community- and facility-based resources.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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