Health through the eyes of youths: a qualitative study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Emerging definitions of health have suggested a shift in focus to one's ability to manage their health condition, function, and social determinants of health. The construct of health for youths with mental health and substance use disorders (MHSU) is complex and multi-dimensional with interplay between biological, behavioral, and social conditions. Expanding definitions of health is crucial in the measurement of health and evaluation of integrated youth services (IYS) systems for people with MHSU disorders. Hence, it is critical to understand the construct of health from the perspective of a young person living with a MHSU disorder. Methods: This study was conducted using inductive thematic analysis. Three focus groups were conducted from July to August 2017. Results: A total of 22 youths (17-24 years) took part in this study. Results showed that health is a multidimensional construct situated in the ecosystem of a person's environment. Health can be understood from two macro themes: Individual health and Determinants of health. It consisted of physical health, mental health, day-to-day functioning, and being in control of your own health condition. Systemic and social factors were factors that influenced the state of health. Conclusion: This study contributes to a conceptualization of good health in youth with MHSU disorders. This conceptualization can aid in the development of more accurate measures of health and functioning and the evaluation of mental health services for youth with MHSU.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".