Intervention outcome preferences for youth who are out of work and out of school: a qualitative study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: While interventions have been developed and tested to help youth who have become disconnected from work and school, there is a paucity of research on young people's intervention preferences. This study aims to understand young people's preferred intervention outcomes and approaches for youth who are out of work and school. METHODS: Thirty youth participated in virtual focus groups. Transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Youth want interventions and approaches that support them in (1) vocational readiness, (2) securing a job, and (3) mental health and well-being, while providing them with (4) high-contact, individualized, and integrated support. CONCLUSIONS: Young people want interventions to be individualized and integrated, providing a high level of support for their educational and employment pursuits as well as their mental health and well-being. Incorporating youth's perspectives when designing interventions can increase intervention relevance and potentially service uptake, helping youth continue to pursue their educational and vocational goals.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".