Evidence based consensus statements for digital tools to address youth mental health literacy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mental health disorders typically emerge in early life and can be modified through prompt intervention. Mental health literacy is the multi-dimensional knowledge of mental health disorders to recognize, manage, or prevent mental health disorders. Enhancing youth mental health literacy through information communication technologies already adopted by youth may be an accessible and effective approach to address the ongoing mental health crisis. We used an interconnected, three phase process following co-design methods to determine evidence-based consensus statements to conceptualize and develop the Youth MindTrack and to inform future digital tools to support youth mental health literacy. In Phase I, a scientific team (N = 21; 24% youth) adhered to deliberative dialogue and priority setting methods to develop strategic priorities. Phase II consisted of a modified Delphi consensus process to determine evidence-based consensus statements (N = 352 (13% youth) Round 1; N = 87 (33% youth) Round 2). Semi-structured focus groups in Phase III were conducted to refine the consensus statements (N = 16, 25% youth) and design the digital mental health literacy tool (N = 24, 33% youth). Twenty-one consensus statements encompassing four domains were produced: (1) Understanding mental health (N = 4); (2) Exercising mental health (N = 6); (3) Engaging with digital support (N = 8); and (4) Evaluating digital support (N = 3). Content analysis of discussions identified 16 themes mapped to the domains of mental health literacy and user-interface, design considerations for digital tools on mental health literacy more broadly. The resulting design of the Youth MindTrack tool to support mental health literacy included four main interactive sections designed to be downloaded and completed by youth on a digital device. We determined 21 evidence-based consensus statements that underpinned the conceptualization and development of the Youth MindTrack: a downloadable digital tool to support youth mental health literacy. The data supports proceeding to pilot testing to assess the tool's usability, acceptability, and perceived effectiveness prior to implementation, and provides evidence that an iterative and participatory research-based process with youth can help adapt health technology to their needs.
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 | 0.437 | 0.546 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.022 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.011 | 0.020 |
| Research integrity | 0.013 | 0.014 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.004 |
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".