Community-embedded positive mental health promotion programs for the general population: A scoping review protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To chart the body of literature on Positive Mental Health Promotion (PMHP) programing and to document the current PMHP in one Canadian province to provide insight into the types, scope, and nature of the programs currently and historically available to community residents in this province. Introduction: Positive mental health promotion is an emerging field within community mental health. Programming and policy efforts devoted to promoting mental health are emerging. These efforts are varied in scope and nature, and there is little consensus or evidence based best practices, and alignment with the provincial mental health policy.Inclusion criteria: Peer-reviewed literature relevant to community mental health promotion, and grey literature that contains details of relevant programs accessible to the general community.Methods: A preliminary search strategy in PubMed, EBSCO, and PsychINFO was developed with a librarian and a JBI-trained researcher. Primary studies published after 2000 in English evaluating or documenting PMHPs, will be included. Grey literature from an environmental scan of existing local programs will be included. Data to be extracted includes, study methodology and methods, program scope, content, materials, evaluation and outcomes
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 | 0.007 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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".