MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4411193695 · doi:10.1093/pch/pxaf045

The ages and stages of paediatric social prescribing

2025· article· en· W4411193695 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mackenzie Merrell Macza Heidel, Lorynn Labbie, Andrea Moir, Emi Rucinski, Ananna Bhadra Arna, Maggie Haitian Wang, Shaoni Chakraborty, Sarah Wong, Lily Yang, Alejandra Van Dusen, Jessica Middlemis Maher

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArt Therapy and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaWestern UniversityMcMaster UniversityUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHistoryPediatricsMedicinePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Social determinants of health can profoundly impact child and adolescent health outcomes. As demands on Canadian primary health care continue to grow, there is an increasing risk that patients' needs will go unmet. Social prescribing offers a practical way to address these concerns across all ages. Using a personalized approach, social prescribing enables healthcare professionals to identify individuals' non-medical needs and connect them with appropriate community resources via dedicated community connectors. These connectors can collaborate with children, adolescents, and their families to explore their values, co-create a social prescription, support its implementation, and provide longitudinal follow-up. Pediatric healthcare providers are particularly well-poised to make these referrals to deliver comprehensive care that supports their patients' holistic development. This commentary highlights representative examples of Canadian social prescribing initiatives that can benefit pediatric patients, emphasizing how these practices can be adapted across developmental stages and grow alongside the individual.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.769
Threshold uncertainty score0.465

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.012
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child Health→Same topicArt Therapy and Mental Health→French-language works237,207→