MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401244414 · doi:10.1177/10398562241271053

The 2024-2025 Commonwealth Budget for Mental Health: Funding unproven initiatives and stings in the tail

2024· editorial· en· W4401244414 on OpenAlexaff
Jeffrey CL Looi, Stephen Allison, Tarun Bastiampillai, Steve Kisely

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralasian Psychiatry · 2024
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Treatment and Access
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommonwealthMental healthDepression (economics)MedicinePsychiatryAnxietyPopulationPsychological interventionMental illnessHealth careSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Environmental healthPolitical scienceEconomic growthEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We discuss the ramifications of the Commonwealth of Australia Budget allocations for mental healthcare for 2024-2025. There is funding for population-based mental health initiatives for milder anxiety and depression but no direct funding of services for the most severe and disabling forms of mental illness, other than pre-existing state/territory disbursements from the Commonwealth for state-based health services. There are substantial concerns that the Commonwealth funding has potentially been misallocated to ineffective interventions that are unlikely to reduce the population prevalence of mild anxiety and depression in Australia. Funds may have been better allocated to provide effective care for those with the most severe and disabling illnesses including schizophrenia, bipolar disorder and severe depression.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.040
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.040
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0100.007
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0220.029
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.014

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.374 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralasian PsychiatrySame topicMental Health Treatment and AccessFrench-language works237,207