MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367849805 · doi:10.12927/hcq.2023.27058

Filling Data Gaps in Access to Mental Health and Substance Use Services

2023· article· en· W4367849805 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Allison Sabad, Sara Grimwood, Andrea D. Foebel, Mélanie Josée Davidson

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare Quarterly · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Health Information
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthSubstance useBest practiceBusinessNursingMedicinePsychologyPsychiatryPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Improving access to mental health and substance use (MHSU) services continues to be an area of growing concern in Canada, amplified by the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. It was also identified as a priority for federal, provincial and territorial governments in the Shared Health Priorities (SHP) work (CIHI n.d.a.). As part of the SHP work, the Canadian Institute for Health Information recently released 2022 results for two newly developed indicators that help to fill data and information gaps in understanding access to MHSU services in Canada. The first, "Early Intervention for Mental Health and Substance Use among Children and Youth," showed that three in five children and youth (aged 12-24 years) with self-reported early needs accessed at least one community MHSU service in Canada. The second, "Navigation of Mental Health and Substance Use Services," revealed that two out of five Canadians (15 years and older) who accessed at least one MHSU service said that they always or usually had support navigating their services.

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)0.068
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.196
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 score0.753
Threshold uncertainty score0.497

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0680.196
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0110.017
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0050.008
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.177
GPT teacher head0.485
Teacher spread0.308 · 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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare QuarterlySame topicHomelessness and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207