MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3081537759 · doi:10.1177/2167696820946894

Modeling the Reduction of Attrition in Campus Mental Health Services: A Discrete Choice Conjoint Experiment

2020· article· en· W3081537759 on OpenAlexafffund
Charles E. Cunningham, Heather Rimas, Thipiga Sivayoganathan, Bailey Stewart, Catharine Munn, Robert B. Zipursky, Bruce K. Christensen, Ivana Furimsky

Bibliographic record

VenueEmerging Adulthood · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersCanadian Health Services Research Foundation
KeywordsMental healthResidenceAttritionLatent class modelClass (philosophy)Mental health servicePsychologyService (business)Medical educationClinical psychologyPsychiatryMedicineDemographyMarketingComputer scienceBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A significant percentage of college students discontinue mental health treatment prematurely. Using a discrete choice experiment, 909 students chose between experimentally manipulated descriptions of mental health services, selecting the option that would encourage them to stay in treatment. Latent class analysis identified three groups. The community class (36.7%) would remain in treatment at community walk-in clinics. The campus class (27.3%) would be more likely to remain in an on-campus student health service. The residence class, 36.0% of participants, would be most likely to remain in treatments at their residence. All classes would be more likely to remain in services including the option of medication, psychotherapy, or alternative treatments such as diet and exercise. Simulations predicted that most students would trade individual treatment for more cost-effective groups if students who had experienced mental health problems recommended these services and access to text messages and telephone help was included.

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)0.028
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.045
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.146

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0280.045
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEmerging AdulthoodSame topicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesFrench-language works237,207