MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3117348098

Analysis of the child and adolescent needs and strengths assessment in a First Nation population

2017· dissertation· en· W3117348098 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kristy R. Kowatch

Bibliographic record

VenueKnowledge Commons (Lakehead University) · 2017
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEarly Childhood Education and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyPopulationDevelopmental psychologyPolitical scienceMedicineEnvironmental health
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

First Nations youth are one of the fastest growing demographics in Canada, yet they are more likely to experience adverse health and life circumstances than non-Indigenous Canadians. Developing and implementing appropriate interventions for mental health is a priority area in decreasing this health gap, and requires the incorporation of First Nation models of mental wellness. Mental Wellness for First Nations? youth is tied to interpersonal and cultural factors such as relationships with caregivers and the greater community, caregiver and/or community access to necessary resources, and cultural identities. Examining these wider sociocultural factors, in combination with youth characteristics and strengths, provides a more comprehensive understanding of how to address mental health needs in First Nation communities. Working in collaboration with a First Nation based community health provider, the Child and Adolescents Needs and Strengths (CANS) assessment was analyzed for 178 First Nation children to identify specific mental health intervention needs and explore predictors of mental health needs. The CANS is a reliable measure that assesses youth mental health needs, caregiver needs, individual strengths, environmental strengths, as well as many other factors. The most commonly reported mental health intervention needs were seen for Anxiety, Mood, Emotional Control, and Adjustment to Trauma. Hierarchical regression identified referents? age, sex, Functioning, Individual Strengths, and Family/Caregiver Needs and Strengths domain scores as predictive of mental health intervention needs. Age and Functioning domain scores were robust individual predictors of mental health needs across most models, yet sex was not individually predictive in any model.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.674
Threshold uncertainty score0.648

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKnowledge Commons (Lakehead University)Same topicEarly Childhood Education and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207