MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281253615 · doi:10.1177/08404704221092691

Lessons learned developing and deploying a provincial virtual mental health support during the COVID-19 pandemic

2022· article· en· W4281253615 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Gillian Strudwick, Tracie Risling, Iman Kassam, Hwayeon Danielle Shin, Tyler Moss, Courtney Carlberg, Wenjia Zhou

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare Management Forum · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of CalgaryApotex (Canada)University of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchSaskatchewan Health Research Foundation
KeywordsPandemicCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Mental healthService (business)Health care2019-20 coronavirus outbreakHealth servicesSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Mental health servicePublic relationsBusinessPolitical scienceComputer scienceKnowledge managementPsychologyMedicineEnvironmental healthMarketingVirology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Significant efforts have been put into implementing virtual forms of healthcare and supports since the beginning of the pandemic. However, limited information has been shared with health leaders about how this has taken place, and what can be learned from this to move forward into the future. The purpose of this article is to describe lessons learned co-designing and developing a virtual health support during the COVID-19 pandemic in the province of Saskatchewan. In this article, we anchor these lessons learned on a specific virtual health service support, "SaskWell," which offers a digital service, and aims to connect residents of the province to digital mental health supports and resources.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.109

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.006
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0040.009
Research integrity0.0040.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.310 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare Management ForumSame topicTelemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationFrench-language works237,207