An Argument for More High‐Quality Research Focused on Mental Health in the Post‐Secondary Context
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We argue that while a substantial proportion of emerging adults are in post-secondary education, there is relatively little consideration of this context within research and policy around youth mental health. The unique challenges young adults face in post-secondary education overlay underlying risk factors experienced by emerging adults. While post-secondary education facilitates social mobility, it also introduces stressors such as academic demands, financial insecurity and social isolation. As we increasingly appreciate the social determinants of mental health and the influence of institutional systems, understanding the post-secondary context offers promise in transforming mental health in emerging adulthood. There are pockets of great practice. However, we argue that targeted efforts are now needed to bring together students, practitioners, policymakers and researchers to drive evidence-informed improvements in mental health within the post-secondary context.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.107 | 0.241 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.021 |
| Open science | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.042 | 0.071 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.008 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".