Mental health-related disabilities, healthcare utilization, and access in young adults with anxiety and depression: a scoping review protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Young adults with anxiety and depression often face significant challenges accessing healthcare, particularly when their conditions involve functional impairments or mental health-related disabilities (MHRDs). This scoping review will synthesize peer-reviewed research on healthcare access and utilization for individuals aged 18–30 with anxiety and/or depression, examining how disability or impairment is defined and assessed. Using the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology, this protocol outlines a participatory and systematic approach grounded in Canadian policy frameworks and international disability classifications. Findings will inform future research, policy, and practice to improve healthcare equity for young adults with mental health conditions and associated impairments.
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 | 0.094 | 0.084 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.011 | 0.015 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.022 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.054 | 0.008 |
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".