Participatory Methods for Systems Modeling of Youth Mental Health: Implementation Protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite significant investment, mental health issues remain a leading cause of death among young people globally. Sophisticated decision analysis methods are needed to better understand the dynamic and multisector drivers of youth mental health. System modeling can help explore complex issues such as youth mental health and inform strategies to effectively respond to local needs and achieve lasting improvements. The advantages of engaging stakeholders in model development processes have long been recognized; however, the methods for doing so are often not well-described. OBJECTIVE: This paper aims to describe the participatory procedures that will be used to support systems modeling for national multisite implementation. The Right Care, First Time, Where You Live research program will focus on regional youth mental health applications of systems modeling in 8 different sites across Australia. METHODS: The participatory model development approach involves an iterative process of engaging with a range of participants, including people with lived experience of mental health issues. Their knowledge of the local systems, pathways, and drivers is combined with the academic literature and data to populate the models and validate their structure. The process centers around 3 workshops where participants interact and actively engage in group model-building activities to define, refine, and validate the systems models. This paper provides a detailed blueprint for the implementation of this process for mental health applications. RESULTS: The participatory modeling methods described in this paper will be implemented at 2 sites per year from 2022 to 2025. The 8 selected sites have been chosen to capture variations in important factors, including determinants of mental health issues and access to services. Site engagement commenced in August 2021, and the first modeling workshops are scheduled to commence in February 2022. CONCLUSIONS: Mental health system decision makers require tools to help navigate complex environments and leverage interdisciplinary problem-solving. Systems modeling can mobilize data from diverse sources to explore a range of scenarios, including the impact of interventions in different combinations and contexts. Involving stakeholders in the model development process ensures that the model findings are context-relevant and fit-for-purpose to inform decision-making. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/32988.
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 | 0.130 | 0.147 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.155 | 0.017 |
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".