Psychological Screening and Tracking of Athletes and Digital Mental Health Solutions in a Hybrid Model of Care: Mini Review
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
BACKGROUND: There is a persistent need for mental ill-health prevention and intervention among at-risk and vulnerable subpopulations. Major disruptions to life, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, present an opportunity for a better understanding of the experience of stressors and vulnerability. Faster and better ways of psychological screening and tracking are more generally required in response to the increased demand upon mental health care services. The argument that mental and physical health should be considered together as part of a biopsychosocial approach is garnering acceptance in elite athlete literature. However, the sporting population are unique in that there is an existing stigma of mental health, an underrecognition of mental ill-health, and engagement difficulties that have hindered research, prevention, and intervention efforts. OBJECTIVE: The aims of this paper are to summarize and evaluate the literature on athletes' increased vulnerability to mental ill-health and digital mental health solutions as a complement to prevention and intervention, and to show relationships between athlete mental health problems and resilience as well as digital mental health screening and tracking, and faster and better treatment algorithms. METHODS: This mini review shapes literature in the fields of athlete mental health and digital mental health by summarizing and evaluating journal and review articles drawn from PubMed Central and the Directory of Open Access Journals. RESULTS: Consensus statements and systematic reviews indicated that elite athletes have comparable rates of mental ill-health prevalence to the general population. However, peculiar subgroups require disentangling. Innovative expansion of data collection and analytics is required to respond to engagement issues and advance research and treatment programs in the process. Digital platforms, machine learning, deep learning, and artificial intelligence are useful for mental health screening and tracking in various subpopulations. It is necessary to determine appropriate conditions for algorithms for use in recommendations. Partnered with real-time automation and machine learning models, valid and reliable behavior sensing, digital mental health screening, and tracking tools have the potential to drive a consolidated, measurable, and balanced risk assessment and management strategy for the prevention and intervention of the sequelae of mental ill-health. CONCLUSIONS: Athletes are an at-risk subpopulation for mental health problems. However, a subgroup of high-level athletes displayed a resilience that helped them to positively adjust after a period of overwhelming stress. Further consideration of stress and adjustments in brief screening tools is recommended to validate this finding. There is an unrealized potential for broadening the scope of mental health, especially symptom and disorder interpretation. Digital platforms for psychological screening and tracking have been widely used among general populations, but there is yet to be an eminent athlete version. Sports in combination with mental health education should address the barriers to help-seeking by increasing awareness, from mental ill-health to positive functioning. A hybrid model of care is recommended, combining traditional face-to-face approaches along with innovative and evaluated digital technologies, that may be used in prevention and early intervention strategies.
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 | 0.001 | 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 it