Mental Health Crisis in Canada: Exploring the prospect of strengthening the Canada Health Act and Canada Health Transfer to increase access of mental health services and supports for Canadians
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mental health includes one’s psychological, social, and emotional well-being. People need to maintain their mental health since it helps with the way they function in how they feel, act, and think. Different life events can negatively impact an individuals’ mental health resulting in the genesis of a mental illness(es). In Canada, there is a rise in the number of Canadians suffering from a mental illness(es). Individuals suffering from a mental illness(es) generally seek treatment through mental health services and supports. In Canada mental health services and supports can be obtained from a family doctor, psychiatrist, psychologist, psychotherapists, social workers, occupational therapists, etc. However, public health insurance only provides coverage for physician administered services. Meaning mental health services and supports obtained from a family doctor or psychiatrist is covered. Unfortunately, to obtain a referral from a family doctor to see a psychiatrist or receive treatment from a psychiatrist has excessive wait times. This prompts many Canadians to seek help from non-physician mental health professionals such as psychologists. Most Canadians feel that psychologists are qualified to provide treatment, but the costs associated in seeing them as well as lack of coverage from provincial and territorial public health insurance plans pose as barriers in accessing their services. As a result, the mental health needs of Canadians are not met, contributing to the economic, physical health and social consequences to Canada.
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 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.028 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".