MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4412870778 · doi:10.24908/pceea.2025.19584

Building Mental Wellness Capacity in First-Year Engineering Students

2025· article· en· W4412870778 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Milana H Grozic, Emily Marasco, Kim A. Johnston

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicResilience and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyMental healthMental capacityMedical educationMathematics educationEngineeringMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The “First-Year Seminar Series” was developed in response to the current mental health crisis in engineering programs. The series includes 22 targeted interventions designed to build mental wellness capacity and life-long learning skills in first-year engineering students at a large Canadian university by integrating mental health and wellness education directly into the required curriculum. Research-informed best practices were used to optimize effectiveness and content retention. Quantitative and qualitative student feedback was collected. Results suggest that students generally perceived the seminar content as moderately useful/applicable, but only slightly engaging. Qualitative feedback identified specific areas for improvement including incorporating additional interactive activities and reinforcing the applicability of non-technical content. We anticipate that the seminar series contributed positively to students’ mental health. By embedding mental health education into the core curriculum, the Schulich School of Engineering is fostering a culture of wellness and supporting the next generation of resilient engineers.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)→Same topicResilience and Mental Health→French-language works237,207→