Evaluation of the mental health transition navigation model in child and adolescent mental health settings: findings from a pre-post, mixed-methods study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most youth do not experience a coordinated and planned transition out of child and youth mental health services, which often results in discontinuity in mental health care. This gap in care has led to the development and uptake of novel interventions, such as the transition navigation model, to facilitate mental health care transitions. The transition navigation model is a research-informed intervention that aims to assess and improve youth's transition readiness, identify their transition needs and goals, and support the transfer of care to adult or community mental health services. To evaluate the ongoing implementation of this model, we conducted a pre-post mixed-methods study involving youth participants accessing transition navigation services at two hospitals. Participants (n = 43) completed self-report measures on transition readiness, daily functioning, and mental health service use at baseline and 6-month follow-up. Twenty participants also completed qualitative interviews focused on understanding their experiences and satisfaction with the navigation service. Results indicate a significant increase in participants' mean transition readiness score and a decrease in the number of emergency department visits from baseline to the 6-month follow-up. However, there were no significant changes in mean functioning scores or self-reported mental health symptoms. The quantitative and qualitative findings converged, indicating overall high satisfaction with the navigation service, with the primary gap in the service being the lack of communication maintained with youth while in the program.
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 | 0.035 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".