Re-Accessing Mental Health Care After Age 18: A Longitudinal Cohort Study of Youth Involved with Community-based Child and Youth Mental Health Agencies in Ontario.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: About 20-26% of children and youth with a mental health disorder (depending on age and respondent) report receiving services from a community-based Child and Youth Mental Health (CYMH) agency. However, because agencies have an upper age limit of 18-years old, youth requiring ongoing mental health services must "transition" to adult-oriented care. General healthcare providers (e.g., family physicians) likely provide this care. The objective of this study was to compare the likelihood of receiving physician-based mental health services after age 18 between youth who had received community-based mental health services and a matched population sample. METHOD: A longitudinal matched cohort study was conducted in Ontario, Canada. A CYMH cohort that received mental health care at one of five CYMH agencies, aged 7-14 years at their first visit (N=2,822), was compared to age, sex, region-matched controls (N=8,466). RESULTS: CYMH youth were twice as likely as the comparison sample to have a physician-based mental health visit (i.e., by a family physician, pediatrician, psychiatrists) after age 18; median time to first visit was 3.3 years. Having a physician mental health visit before age 18 was associated with a greater likelihood of experiencing the outcome than community-based CYMH services alone. CONCLUSION: Most youth involved in community-based CYMH agencies will re-access services from physicians as adults. Youth receiving mental health services only within community agencies, and not from physicians, may be less likely to receive physician-based mental health services as adults. Collaboration between CYMH agencies and family physicians may be important for youth who require ongoing care into adulthood.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".