Identifying the prerequisites, facilitators, and barriers in improving adolescents’ mental health literacy interventions: A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study aimed at identifying the prerequisites, facilitators, and barriers to adolescent mental health literacy interventions. To that end, databases PsycINFO, Science Direct, Scopus, Emerald, PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were systematically searched, out of which 39 articles that had the inclusion criteria were analyzed by the content analysis. Databases searched from September 30, 2018, to October 10, 2018, with the keywords "health literacy," "mental health literacy," "mental disorders," adolescents, students, and more. Seven themes were identified as the prerequisites for interventions to improve adolescents' mental health literacy including education at the school level, parents' education, training of trainers and providers, cooperation and participation among providers, intervention assessment and monitoring, provision of educational content, consideration of the cultural and linguistic issues. Five themes were identified as facilitators: using interactive learning and teaching methods, supplying diverse and stimulating educational content, employing trainers with different backgrounds, having direct contact with people with mental illness, and utilizing technological advancements in education. Finally, short-time intervention, the collaboration between school administrators and researchers, lack of valid information sources were identified as barriers.
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 | 0.015 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".