MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391160720 · doi:10.1093/pch/pxae002

Social prescribing: Moving pediatric care upstream to improve child health and wellbeing and address child health inequities

2024· article· en· W4391160720 on OpenAlexafffund
Caitlin Muhl, Susan Bennett, Stéphanie Fragman, Nicole Racine

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArt Therapy and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioQueen's UniversityVanier College
FundersPublic Health Agency of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsUpstream (networking)Child healthHealth careMedicineEnvironmental healthPediatricsEconomic growthComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Social prescribing is a means for trusted individuals in clinical and community settings to connect people who have non-medical, health-related social needs to non-clinical supports and services within the community through a non-medical prescription. Evaluations of social prescribing programs for the pediatric population have demonstrated statistically significant improvements in participants' mental, physical, and social wellbeing and reductions in healthcare demand and costs. Experts have pointed to the particularly powerful impact of social prescribing on children's mental health, suggesting that it may help to alleviate the strain on the overburdened mental health system. Social prescribing shows promise as a tool to move pediatric care upstream by addressing non-medical, health-related social needs, hence why there is an urgent need to direct more attention towards the pediatric population in social prescribing research, policy, and practice. This demands rapid action by researchers, policymakers, and child health professionals to support advancements in this area.

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)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0020.010
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.003

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child HealthSame topicArt Therapy and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207