MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3178555782 · doi:10.3138/jmvfh-2021-0012

Gender-related differences in mental health of Canadian Armed Forces members during the COVID-19 pandemic

2021· article· en· W3178555782 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Kerry Sudom, Eva Guérin, Jennifer E. C. Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Military Veteran and Family Health · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCOVID-19 and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthPandemicAnxietyPsychologyDepression (economics)PsychiatryCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Affect (linguistics)MedicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

LAY SUMMARY The challenges associated with the COVID-19 pandemic have the potential to not only adversely affect mental health in general but also to emphasize and widen disparities in mental health across demographic groups. In particular, research suggests that women have been disproportionately affected by the pandemic psychologically, socially, and economically. However, the state of mental health in the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) during the pandemic and the impacts of gender on mental health outcomes are currently unknown. This study uses data collected early in the pandemic to examine the state of mental health of CAF Regular Force members and the impacts of gender and family status. Although most members were doing well, a notable minority were experiencing mental health issues at potentially clinically significant levels, with women more likely to experience depression and anxiety than men and women with children less likely to experience functional impairment as a result of their symptoms. The findings provide a snapshot of the mental health of Regular Force members during the pandemic and suggest the importance of considering gender and family situation in understanding mental health.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.120

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Military Veteran and Family Health→Same topicCOVID-19 and Mental Health→French-language works237,207→