MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321017964 · doi:10.15273/dmj.vol49no1.11642

The Child and Family Traumatic Stress Intervention in Canadian child and youth advocacy centres

2023· article· en· W4321017964 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Laura Davidson

Bibliographic record

VenueDalhousie Medical Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild Abuse and Trauma
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)Context (archaeology)Mental healthTraumatic stressPsychologyService providerMedicineService (business)NursingFamily medicinePsychiatryClinical psychologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The Child and Family Traumatic Stress Intervention (CFTSI) is an evidence-based early intervention shown to reduce post-traumatic stress in children and adolescents. This intervention has not been explored in the context of the Canadian healthcare landscape, and more specifically at Child and Youth Advocacy Centres (CYACs); multi-disciplinary service hubs who serve those exposed to trauma. Objective: Examine the feasibility and usefulness of the CFTSI in the context of Canadian CYACs. Methods: A mixed-methods design was utilized, consisting of a validated, nationally distributed online survey which served as an environmental scan, and key informant interviews, which were thematically analyzed. Results: 15 of 29 invited centres participated. Prior to this study, six of 15 respondents had been aware of the CFTSI. Furthermore, two participants reported current use of the CFTSI. Of the 13 centres not using it, 10 expressed that the CFTSI would be an acceptable and relevant intervention at their centre, and there was significant interest in possible future implementation. Interviews with experienced clinicians revealed benefits and challenges of the CFTSI’s format, and the influence of family structure, culture and trauma history on outcomes. Finally, some considerations specific to Canadian centres were uncovered and direction for future research suggested. Conclusion: Our findings collectively underscore the potential of the CFTSI to bolster mental health services, which are a priority area requiring improvement at Canadian CYACs. Additionally, this study highlights benefits and challenges relevant to Canadian practice and wide-spread implementation of the CFTSI in this country.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.092
Threshold uncertainty score0.367

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0130.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDalhousie Medical JournalSame topicChild Abuse and TraumaFrench-language works237,207