MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4212850886 · doi:10.1002/pits.22679

Embedding equity into school mental health theory, research, and practice: An introduction to the special issue series

2022· article· en· W4212850886 on OpenAlexafffund
Deinera Exner‐Cortens, Larissa M. Gaias, Joni W. Splett, Janine M. Jones, Whitney Walker

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychology in the Schools · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation Discipline and Inequality
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsMental healthEquity (law)Psychological interventionPsychologyOppressionHealth equityInjusticeSociologyPublic relationsSocial psychologyPolitical sciencePublic healthMedicinePsychiatryNursingPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this article, we present an introduction and overview for a two‐part special issue series focused on embedding equity into school mental health through theory, research, and practice. The papers in Part 1 of the special issue series cover critical topics for advancing equitable school mental health, including the centering of community and youth perspectives; a focus on reducing disproportionality in discipline practices; and details on equity‐focused interventions. In Part 2, papers focus on integrating race and racial equity into school mental health frameworks; integrating a racial equity lens into trauma‐informed school practices; addressing outcomes that have disproportionate impacts on youth of color; and exploring domains of injustice and oppression beyond racial inequity. We hope that the topics discussed in this special issue series move us towards providing equitable and just school mental health services for all children and youth.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0070.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.007
Scholarly communication0.0090.012
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0070.015
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.006

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 head0.137
GPT teacher head0.577
Teacher spread0.440 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychology in the SchoolsSame topicEducation Discipline and InequalityFrench-language works237,207