MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Assessing the Pandemic's Impact on Mental Health Awareness: A Canadian Perspective Using Time Series Analysis

2025· article· en· W4406035867 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Economics Management and Political Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutoregressive integrated moving averagePandemicMental healthAnxietyPublic healthDepression (economics)PsychologyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Time seriesPsychiatryMedicineComputer scienceNursingEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on people’s mental health, especially increasing concerns about issues like depression and anxiety. This study analyzed weekly internet search data to observe how public interest in these mental health problems in Canada changed before and during the pandemic. Time series analysis methods were used, such as Seasonal-Trend Decomposition (STL), ARIMA modeling, and change point detection. The results showed that during the early stages of the pandemic, there was a large increase in searches for "depression" and "anxiety." The ARIMA model created a scenario where the pandemic did not happen, showing what the search patterns might have looked like without it. Change point detection also identified key moments, like the March 2020 lockdown, when search behavior changed significantly. Overall, the pandemic worsened public concerns about mental health, with noticeable differences compared to pre-pandemic trends. This shows that there is an urgent need for stronger mental health support during national crises. Future research could use clinical data to further validate these trends.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.264

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.009
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.495
Teacher spread0.371 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Economics Management and Political Sciences→Same topicCOVID-19 epidemiological studies→French-language works237,207→