Bibliographic record
Abstract
To the Editor; I would like to thank Korenblum et al for drawing attention to a valuable and underutilized method of accessing our adolescent population. However, I would also like to correct an inadvertent omission from their article in the May issue of Paediatrics & Child Health, titled ‘It is time to make the grade: Reaching Canadian youth through school-based health centres’. The authors describe a handful of school-based health centres (SBHCs) existing across the country but do not refer to any in the province of Alberta. Here in Edmonton, Alberta, we have an established SBHC that has been providing services for >10 years. Our SBHC exists in the unique environment of a high school for pregnant and parenting teens. Currently, our team consists of two paediatricians, two paediatric nurses, a dedicated birth-control nurse, a mental health counselor and an addictions counselor. The teen parents we support are seen in clinic space within the school for any health care concerns. Their issues vary widely but most frequently involve mental health and contraception. Trust can be a big issue for these young mothers from difficult backgrounds, and having a static group of consistently available health care providers increases their likelihood of accessing care. Also, the adolescent mothers are able to bring their children (many of whom are cared for at the onsite daycare) to be seen by our paediatricians without missing class or having to arrange for outside transportation. The presence of health care providers on site at the school thereby not only benefits the teenage parents and children we serve, but also decreases the burden on our emergency rooms and urgent care clinics. There is a paucity of literature on the effectiveness of SBHCs for adolescent parents. A PubMed search identified only one retrospective review comparing outcomes for pregnant adolescents receiving care in an SBHC with those receiving prenatal care in a hospital based clinic in Baltimore (Maryland) between 1995 and 1997. The authors demonstrated both a decrease in the number of low birth weight infants born and a decreased school dropout rate for mothers receiving care in the SBHC (1,2). I strongly agree with the statements made by Korenblum et al that SBHCs demonstrate significant mental health, medical, educational and financial benefits. These statements are all the more true in a school-based program for adolescent parents in which the health needs of a high-risk population, as well as those of their children, can be addressed. I would challenge my paediatrician colleagues to remember this vulnerable group when considering establishing any new SBHC.
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 | 0.002 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.015 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.036 | 0.020 |
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".