Perspectives on Mental Health Evaluation in Pediatric Pulmonary Hypertension: A Call to Action
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background The already high rates of anxiety and depression among healthy children have increased further since the COVID-19 pandemic began in early 2020. Prepandemic data suggest children with chronic disease were already experiencing increased rates of anxiety and depression as compared to their healthy peers. There is currently a paucity of literature on the prevalence of anxiety and depression in patients with pediatric pulmonary hypertension. In addition, there are no practice recommendations regarding mental health screening in this population. Implications for Providers We evaluated provider perception of mental health screening at 14 pediatric pulmonary hypertension care centers across the United States and Canada using a cross-sectional survey. Thirty-seven providers from 14 pediatric pulmonary hypertension centers in North America completed the survey. Conclusion Health care providers caring for pediatric pulmonary hypertension patients perceive their patient cohort to frequently experience anxiety and depression. In addition, these providers believe that their patients would benefit from formalized, and routine, assessment of anxiety and depression with referral to mental health services as appropriate. This highlights the need to better understand the prevalence of anxiety and depression in pediatric pulmonary hypertension patients and to establish formal mental health screening practices within pediatric pulmonary hypertension care centers.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".