MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Child and youth mental health referrals and care planning needs during the pandemic waves

2024· book-chapter· en· W4400849007 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Shannon L. Stewart, Aadhiya S. Vasudeva, Jeffrey W. Poss

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopments in environmental science · 2024
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFamily Support in Illness
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooChildren’s Health Research InstituteNorthern Digital (Canada)Western University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMental healthPandemicPsychologyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)MedicineEnvironmental healthPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The global coronavirus pandemic led to significant changes in the daily lives of children and youth, including increased exposure to family hardships, school closures, and virtual delivery of mental health and educational services. In this study, routine care data from 28 mental health agencies in Ontario, Canada, obtained using the interRAI Child and Youth Mental Health (ChYMH) instrument, were utilized to compare children's mental health assessment volumes and care planning needs between prepandemic (n = 5636) and postpandemic waves (n = 5743). Findings from a period of five pandemic waves highlighted a sudden drop in assessments at the start of the pandemic, with gradual recovery. Care planning needs to address weight management and suicide risk increased during the pandemic, whereas criminality involvement, educational needs, and interpersonal conflict declined. Service system access was not differentially influenced by age, but was by gender, in-patient status, and some indicators of marginalization. Limitations and clinical implications 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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.503
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopments in environmental scienceSame topicFamily Support in IllnessFrench-language works237,207