Proportion of young people in the general population consulting general practitioners: Potential for mental health screening and prevention
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: One of the main obstacles with prevention in psychiatry is low detection of young subjects at risk for psychosis. The aim of the present work is to test whether general practitioners' (GP) offices are a possible setting for prevention of mental illness. METHODS: We used an Electronic Health Record database (Datanet) representing South-London (Lambeth), where frequency of GP visits were available for each registered subject. RESULTS: We show that in 2018 out of almost 175 000 subjects aged 12 to 35, almost six out of ten people were seen by their General practitioner at least once in 2018, and considering those subjects with at least one medical condition, around nine subjects out of ten did the same. CONCLUSIONS: A high proportion of adolescents and young adults are seen by GPs at least once per year. GP offices should be tested as possible setting for detection of subjects at risk for mental illness, in particular in subjects with risk factors for mental illness.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".