Deaf mental health: enhancing literacy through a hearing and deaf community collaboration
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
This article explores the process through which findings of a doctoral study became the impetus for the development of a Deaf Mental Health Committee and two community-based events intended to enhance the mental health literacy of the Deaf community in a large metropolitan city in central Canada. The author, a hearing professional and University professor has provided professional counselling services to clients including those who are Deaf and hard of hearing, and conducted a number of studies in and with the Deaf community. Her doctoral study reported on the experience and narratives of a sample of Deaf adults diagnosed with Major Depressive Disorder. Participant narratives highlighted gaps in understanding of mental health and mental illness. A goal of enhancing mental health literacy in the Deaf community developed into the establishment of a Deaf Mental Health Committee. This article presents the successes of that Deaf and hearing collaboration.
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