MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394573499 · doi:10.1177/1357633x241239715

Expanding our understanding of digital mental health interventions for Indigenous youth: An updated systematic review

2024· review· en· W4394573499 on OpenAlexafffund
Lydia J. Hicks, Elaine Toombs, Jessie Lund, Kristy R. Kowatch, C. A. Hopkins, Christopher J. Mushquash

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Telemedicine and Telecare · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCommunity Health and Development
Canadian institutionsThunder Bay Regional Research InstituteThunderbird Partnership FoundationThunder Bay Regional Health Sciences CentreLakehead University
FundersCanada Research ChairsCanada Foundation for Innovation
KeywordsPsychological interventionMental healthIndigenousIntervention (counseling)PsychologyMedicineSystematic reviewGrey literatureApplied psychologyMEDLINENursingPsychiatryPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Past research has examined available literature on electronic mental health interventions for Indigenous youth with mental health concerns. However, as there have recently been increases in both the number of studies examining electronic mental health interventions and the need for such interventions (i.e. during periods of pandemic isolation), the present systematic review aims to provide an updated summary of the available peer-reviewed and grey literature on electronic mental health interventions applicable to Indigenous youth. The purpose of this review is to better understand the processes used for electronic mental health intervention development. Among the 48 studies discussed, smoking cessation and suicide were the most commonly targeted mental health concerns in interventions. Text message and smartphone application (app) interventions were the most frequently used delivery methods. Qualitative, quantitative, and/or mixed outcomes were presented in several studies, while other studies outlined intervention development processes or study protocols, indicating high activity in future electronic mental health intervention research. Among the findings, common facilitators included the use of community-based participatory research approaches, representation of culture, and various methods of motivating participant engagement. Meanwhile, common barriers included the lack of necessary resources and limits on the amount of support that online interventions can provide. Considerations regarding the standards and criteria for the development of future electronic mental health interventions for Indigenous youth are offered and future research directions are discussed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.984

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.314
GPT teacher head0.542
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations14
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Telemedicine and TelecareSame topicCommunity Health and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207