MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285023200 · doi:10.1007/s44192-022-00020-3

Reflecting on earlier affected areas that shaped COVID-19 mental health efforts

2022· article· en· W4285023200 on OpenAlexafffund
Shawna Narayan, Vivian W. L. Tsang, Yue Qian

Bibliographic record

VenueDiscover Mental Health · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCOVID-19 and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of British ColumbiaFaculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia
KeywordsMental healthPandemicPsychological interventionCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Context (archaeology)Public healthPopulation2019-20 coronavirus outbreakHealth carePsychologyMedicineEnvironmental healthPolitical scienceEconomic growthPsychiatryNursingGeographyVirologyDiseaseInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The COVID-19 pandemic is a serious public health threat that many countries in the world are facing. While several measures are being taken to minimize the spread of infection, mental health efforts must address psychological challenges due to the pandemic. This commentary reflects on original research from earlier epicenters of COVID-19 and identifies effective practices and suggestions applicable to mental health interventions in the North American context. Tailored mental health services need to be provided for populations that are at high risk of infection. Suggested interventions targeting specific population groups, such as healthcare workers, COVID-19 patients, and vulnerable populations, are discussed.

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)0.042
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.135

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.042
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0130.013
Scholarly communication0.0080.010
Open science0.0030.009
Research integrity0.0130.032
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.485
Teacher spread0.354 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiscover Mental HealthSame topicCOVID-19 and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207