MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407702961 · doi:10.1037/ccp0000938

A whole-of-society approach to depression prevention during the global pandemic: Preliminary data from three large-scale trials.

2025· article· en· W4407702961 on OpenAlexaff
Tracy R. G. Gladstone, Patrick Pössel, Cheryl Lefaiver, Kristin Berg, Kristen N. Kenan, Katherine R. Buchholz, Iulia Mihaila, Marian Fitzgibbon, A. Brianna Sheppard, Hélène A. Gussin, Cathy L. Joyce, Huma Khan, Jason Canel, Michael Gerges, Michael L. Berbaum, Linda Schiffer, Kathleen R. Diviak, Matthew Lowther, Rebecca T. Feinstein, Amanda Knepper, Erica Plunkett, Katherine Lashway, Pia M Montenegro, Amy Kane, Yang Liu, Ann Thornton, Emily Pela, Caterina Patriarca, Ashley McHugh, Calvin Rusiewski, Shion Kabasele, Patrick Ryczek, Kenneth A. Rasinski, Benjamin W. Van Voorhees

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Health Services and Policy Research
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthNational Institutes of HealthPatient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute
KeywordsPandemicPsychologyScale (ratio)Depression (economics)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Clinical psychologyPsychiatryPsychotherapistMedicineGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Despite the prevalence of depressive disorders among youth, there is no health system model to address the prevention of these disorders. METHOD: = 780), which examines the feasibility and potential benefit of a coordinated care, risk stratification, and intervention matching approach for adolescents with intellectual and developmental disabilities using both CATCH-IT (lower risk) and the Coping with Depression Course-Adolescent (higher risk). RESULTS: The study samples for all three trials include youth from traditionally underrepresented groups (71.8%) with some economic distress (47.6%). Intervention utilization was moderate across trials. Feedback from study teams reveals general barriers to implementation and challenges specific to the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: We review these trials, report preliminary data on demographics and intervention utilization, and provide feedback from study teams on implementation challenges encountered. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.258
GPT teacher head0.555
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 designRandomized trial
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 venueJournal of Consulting and Clinical PsychologySame topicDigital Mental Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207