MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400831347 · doi:10.46234/ccdcw2024.163

The Role of Peer Support in Promoting Mental Health of Chinese Adolescents

2024· article· en· W4400831347 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueChina CDC Weekly · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthPeer supportPsychologyPeer reviewPolitical sciencePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The concept of peer support has been utilized to foster emotional support, skill development, and positive social interactions among peers.Various forms of peer support include group activities, mentoring programs, peer counseling, and other structured interventions designed to enhance communication and collaboration among young individuals.These strategies promote empathy and understanding, thereby improving mental health outcomes, reducing social isolation and stigma, and boosting overall wellbeing.Furthermore, peer support empowers young individuals by equipping them with necessary tools and resources to actively manage their mental health symptoms. BACKGROUND The Concept of Peer Support for Adolescent Mental HealthThe importance of mental health in children and adolescents cannot be overstated, given its potential for reversibility and its tendency to present in clusters.Peer support is critically important in addressing the mental health needs of adolescents, as supported by current data and evidence.Peer support among adolescents, initially introduced in the 1970s in the United States as an innovative method to enhance mental health and well-being, has expanded globally.This approach gained traction in Canada and Australia during the 1980s and is now employed in numerous countries, including the United Kingdom (UK), Italy, Spain, Finland, Japan, New Zealand, Saudi Arabia, Norway, the Netherlands, and South Africa (1).In 2005, Street and Herts articulated a comprehensive definition of peer support as "using the knowledge, skills, and experience of children and young people in a planned and structured way to understand, support, inform, and help develop the skills, understanding, confidence, and self-awareness of other children and young people with whom they have something in common" (2). International ExperiencesNumerous international organizations have

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.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.242
Threshold uncertainty score0.340

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.287 · 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