Social Work Practice in Mental Health: cross-cultural perspectives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This book represents the sharing of knowledge and experiences that is cross-cultural, cross-disciplinary and across countries. It aims bringing to the social work practitioner a wealth of understanding about situations, practices and cultures that could not possibly have been experienced first-hand about mental health. The book provides cross cultural perspectives on recovery; strengths based practice, mindfulness, disaster & mental health, community mental health and other related aspects. These contributions from across the world, from different cultures, and from vastly different experiences are a celebration of the global practice of social work. The series of chapters in this book makes a contribution to a deeper understanding of various facets of social work in mental health. The complexities elucidated here can be addressed by embracing the power of teamwork, the power of visionary leadership and the power of reflexivity. The book offers an opportunity for practitioners to explore all these in detail.
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 | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.025 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".