See us, hear us! children, adolescents and families in Saskatchewan coping with mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To examine the lived experiences of children and adolescents coping with mental health issues and seeking mental health services in Saskatchewan during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: In our descriptive phenomenological qualitative study, we interviewed forty-six individuals, including children aged 8-15 and their parents. Thematic analysis was applied to interpret the interview data. RESULTS: Our analysis identified three key themes: pyscho-behavioural impact, academic impact, and social impact. The pandemic adversely affected children due to factors like changes in behaviours such as increased screen time and decreased physical activity, limited access to mental health services, and disruptions to schooling and social interactions. Coping mechanisms varied, ranging from the utilization of available mental health supports and services to individual and family-based strategies. Disparities in timely access to mental health services were evident, with financially stable families accessing private services, while others struggled, particularly in rural areas. Families demonstrated resilience through parental efforts to seek balance and prioritize safety amidst COVID-19 challenges. CONCLUSIONS: Social connectedness served as a crucial buffer against pandemic-induced stress. Children faced difficulty in accessing timely mental health services and supports. Echoing participant experiences, our findings emphasize the urgency of targeted interventions and policy adjustments to address existing gaps in mental health service accessibility and availability.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".