The interRAI Child and Youth Suite of Mental Health Assessment Instruments: An Integrated Approach to Mental Health Service Delivery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Various biological, social, psychological, and environmental factors impact children and youth living with mental health problems across their lifespan. To meet the wide-ranging challenges of mental illness, service system integration is needed to improve efficiencies and reduce fragmentation. Unfortunately, the mental health system has been plagued by the lack of coordination across services. There is a general consensus that mental health service delivery must ensure a child or youth's needs are addressed in a collaborative, coordinated, and seamless manner. A key element to successful integration is the development of a comprehensive standardized screening and assessment system. Numerous assessments have been developed to assess child mental health and functioning, but they typically have a very narrow focus with limited use and utility. Not only does this reduce the ability to take a life course perspective to mental health, but this uncoordinated approach also results in redundancies in information collected, additional resources, and increased assessor burden for children, youth, and their families. The interRAI child and youth mental health assessment suite was developed in response to the need for an integrated mental health system for young persons. This suite includes screening and assessment instruments for in-patient and community settings, emergency departments, educational settings, and youth justice custodial facilities. The instruments form a mental health information system intentionally designed to work in an integrated fashion beginning in infancy, and incorporate key applications such as care planning, outcome measurement, resource allocation, and quality improvement. The design of these assessment tools and their psychometric properties are reviewed. Data is then presented using examples related to interpersonal trauma, illustrating the use and utility of the integrated suite, along with the various applications of these assessment systems.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".