Mental health and psychosocial support for children with upper limb musculoskeletal conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study describes mental health and psychosocial screening processes, access to care and interventions provided to children with upper limb musculoskeletal conditions. A cross-sectional e-survey study was conducted of 107 healthcare professionals who work with children with congenital hand and upper limb differences and brachial plexus birth injuries. Of them, 41 (38%) reported that they routinely screen for mental health and psychosocial concerns. Few (12%) reported the use of standardized outcome measures. In total, 51 (48%) healthcare professionals reported that there was a waiting list for mental health services at their institution. Collectively, healthcare professionals were unsatisfied with the staffing, access to care and types of interventions available. Reported barriers to care included the growing need for mental health support, lack of resources and poor continuity of care after referrals. Future research should focus on identifying and validating a mental health screening tool and investigating the processes affecting access to mental health care. Level of evidence: IV
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 | 0.001 | 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".