MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4399681106 · doi:10.1186/s12913-024-11157-y

Videoconferencing in mental health services for children and adolescents receiving child welfare services: a scoping review

2024· review· en· W4399681106 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Marian Ådnanes, Jannike Kaasbøll, Silje Lill Kaspersen, Vibeke Krane

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Health Services Research · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSINTEF Industri
KeywordsVideoconferencingMental healthHealth informaticsNursing researchHealth administrationMedicineWelfareNursingHealth services researchPublic healthPsychiatryMultimedia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Videoconferencing is considered an alternative to face-to-face consultations and a possibility to help overcome access-to-care barriers in mental health care services. Barriers to child and adolescent mental health services are particularly apparent in the case of children and adolescents receiving child welfare services. This scoping review aims to provide an overview of research on videoconferencing in the mental health treatment of children and adolescents receiving support from child welfare services. METHODS: This scoping review follows the review framework outlined by the Joanna Briggs Institute. The following databases were searched from January 2012 to April 2024: Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, PsycINFO (Ovid), CINAHL Plus, Social Services Abstracts (ProQuest), Sociological Abstracts (ProQuest), and Google Scholar. RESULTS: The search yielded 4322 unique records and resulted in the inclusion of 22 articles that met the inclusion criteria. The studies originated from Denmark, England, Australia, Norway, Canada, Chile, and the USA, and were grouped into four areas: (1) videoconferencing to increase access to mental health treatment for vulnerable groups (2) young people's perspectives (3) videoconferencing in interdisciplinary collaborative meetings, and (4) use, awareness, and acceptance of videoconferencing among health and social care providers. CONCLUSIONS: This scoping review shows that if videoconferencing in mental health care is to become an established and trusted method aimed at children and adolescents receiving child welfare services, several unresolved and potentially negative issues need attention and more research. This particularly applies to whether videoconferencing decreases or exacerbates inequalities in access to mental health services. A further question is whether new barriers are raised by screen-based treatment to threaten good therapeutic relationships, and by extension treatment quality and clinical outcomes.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.049
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.049
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.0110.015
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.513
Teacher spread0.417 · 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 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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Health Services Research→Same topicTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation→French-language works237,207→