MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4413026341 · doi:10.12927/hcq.2025.27634

Foundry, the British Columbia Integrated Youth Services Initiative: Sharing Lessons From a Decade of Innovation

2025· article· en· W4413026341 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Kelli Wuerth, Karen Tee, Steve Mathias, Skye Barbic

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare Quarterly · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation Systems and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBest practiceBusinessManagementEngineering managementEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Youth in Canada are experiencing mental health and substance use challenges at alarming rates. One response to address these concerns that has received considerable provincial/territorial, federal and philanthropic support is Integrated Youth Services (IYS). The British Columbia (BC) IYS initiative, called Foundry, is quickly approaching its 10-year anniversary, with the original proof-of-concept centre having opened in 2015. With 47,000 unique youth attending over 320,000 visits from April 2018 to March 2024 and with 17 operating physical centres (additional 18 in development) and a provincial virtual service, Foundry is filling a gap for youth mental health and substance use services in BC. In this article, we look back at the development of Foundry, share lessons for jurisdictions pursuing their own IYS initiatives, outline the vital role of policy makers in progressing IYS in Canada and look ahead to the next phase of IYS.

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)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.871
Threshold uncertainty score0.938

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0250.021
Scholarly communication0.0250.009
Open science0.0060.018
Research integrity0.0070.011
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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.330 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare Quarterly→Same topicEducation Systems and Policy→French-language works237,207→