Shared Priorities, Data and Reporting: Improving Access to Mental Health, Addictions and Home Care Services
Bibliographic record
Abstract
IntroductionAround the world, the need for mental health, addictions and home care services is growing. Government commitment and collective efforts to bridge data gaps, develop indicators and publicly report results are key elements in Canada’s efforts to improve access. Objectives and ApproachThis symposium will demonstrate how a coalition of stakeholders united to use real-world data to measure progress and drive change. Each presentation highlights a different aspect of the project with participant interaction, aiming for the Canadian context to spark knowledge exchange across sectors and countries: Presentation 1 - Coalitions and consensus (10 min.): processes and engagement for successful collaboration between governments, providers, measurement experts and people with lived experiences to select and develop indicators Facilitated Q&A (5 min.) Presentation 2 - Standards and data infrastructure (10 min.): new standards to enhance data comparability and strengthened data infrastructure to support measurement and reporting Facilitated Q&A (5 min.) Presentation 3 - Indicator development (10 min.): the indicator development cycle, methodological approaches using linked and partial data, and development strategies for new concepts Facilitated Q&A (5 min.) Presentation 4 - Public reporting and policy impact (10 min.): describes how public reporting supports sustained commitments and energizes change using targeted tools and messages Facilitated Q&A (15 min.) ResultsPublic reporting began in 2019, with 3 new indicators released annually over 4 years. Initial reporting provides a baseline to track improvements, and a starting point for health system planners to learn from peers across Canada. The indicators have been a catalyst to fill important data gaps in emergency and home care services. Conclusion / ImplicationsThrough shared priorities, coalitions and linked data, information gaps are being filled to drive advancements in access to mental health and addictions services, and home care. Lessons learned in Canada can be adapted internationally to galvanize needed improvements in these sectors.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.121 | 0.106 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.025 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.022 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.003 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".