MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4401921831 · doi:10.1192/j.eurpsy.2024.251

Prevalence and predictors of Anxiety and Depression among Adolescents and Young Adults: Findings from the MoreGoodDays Support Program in Alberta, Canada

2024· article· en· W4401921831 on OpenAlexaffabout
A. Belinda, Reham Shalaby, Karen Hay, R. Pattison, Ejemai Eboreime, Mark Korthuis, Yingliang Wei, Vincent I. O. Agyapong

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Psychiatry · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityGlenrose Rehabilitation HospitalSickKids FoundationUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDepression (economics)AnxietyPsychologyClinical psychologyPsychiatryGerontologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a rise in psychological disorders among adolescents and young adults. There is an increase in the prevalence of likely anxiety and likely depression among the subscribers of MoreGoodDays supportive text message program, reflecting the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on this cohort. Objectives To assess the prevalence, severity, and correlates of likely generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) and likely major depressive disorder (MDD) among subscribers of MoreGoodDays program. Methods This study used a cross-sectional design. An online survey questionnaire was used to collect sociodemographic and clinical information from subscribers of MoreGoodDays program, a daily supportive text message program co-designed with adolescents and young adults for their peers in Alberta. Validated instruments, the Generalized Anxiety Disorder GAD-7 and Patient Health Questionnaire-9 PHQ-9 were used to collect information on likely GAD and likely major depressive disorder (MDD), respectively. Data was analyzed with SPSS version 25 using chi-squared tests and binary logistic regression analysis. Results 343 subscribers of MoreGoodDays participated in the survey. Overall, 117 (56.0%) respondents had a likely MDD and 97 (46.6%) had a likely GAD. Participants who would like to receive mental health counselling were 27 times more likely to experience GAD (OR = 27; 95% CI: 3.09–250.00) and 40 times more likely to experience MDD (OR = 40.03; 95% CI: 4.43–361.51) than those who did not. Respondents who had received mental health counselling in the past were 18.5 times more likely to experience MDD compared with those who had not (OR = 18.52; 95% CI: 1.55–200.00). Demographic variables, including age, education, employment, and relationship status, and clinical variables, such as history of anxiety, depression, obsessive-compulsive disorder, ADHD, and adverse childhood experience, did not independently the predict presence of likely GAD or MDD in subscribers of MoreGoodDays. Conclusions The prevalence of anxiety and depression was relatively high among subscribers of MoreGoodDays, indicating the long-term effect of the COVID-19 pandemic. This finding has significant implications in the broader context of mental health research and emphasizes the need for more research into innovative mental health support for this cohort. The desire to receive counselling was predictive of both anxiety and depression and is a positive sign of the openness of this cohort to receive psychological intervention. Since this group is mostly adapted to mobile text technology, government agencies and policymakers should prioritize and implement readily accessible interventions such as supportive text messages to support their psychological well-being. Disclosure of Interest None Declared

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)0.001
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.097

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Psychiatry→Same topicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development→French-language works237,207→