Considering ecological determinants of youth mental health in the era of COVID‐19 and the Anthropocene: A call to action from young public health professionals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2019, young Australians reported that two of their top concerns were 'climate change and the environment' and 'mental health'. The events of 2020/2021, such as the ongoing climate emergency, the Australian bushfires, and the COVID-19 pandemic, reflect the human-induced environmental issues young people are most worried about and have also exacerbated the mental health issues which they already reported to be at a crisis point back in 2019. Given experiences of mental illness in adolescence are associated with poorer mental health across the lifespan, it is becoming increasingly important to address ecological determinants of youth mental health in the Anthropocene. However, despite the inclusion of ecological determinants of health in seminal health promotion frameworks, health promotion has been described as 'ecologically blind', emphasising social determinants of health at the expense of ecological determinants of health. A socio-ecological model, which equally considers upstream social and ecological factors, should be applied to youth mental health issues. Using the Ottawa Charter for Health Promotion, we demonstrate how the ecological determinants of health may be incorporated into health promotion approaches targeting youth mental health. We also call for the health promotion sector to consider a number of actions to work towards achieving a transition to ecological determinants of health being at the forefront of health promotion activities. This commentary, written by young public health professionals, hopes to build on the momentum garnered by youth activists around the world and bring attention to the importance of ecological determinants of health for youth mental health promotion in the era of COVID-19 and the Anthropocene.
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 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 | 0.017 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".