Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, it becomes important to comprehend service utilization patterns and evaluate disparities in mental health-related service access among children. Objective This study uses administrative health records to investigate the association between early developmental vulnerability and healthcare utilization among children in Alberta, Canada from 2016 to 2022. Methods Children who participated in the 2016 Early Development Instrument (EDI) assessment and were covered by public Alberta health insurance were included (N = 23 494). Linear regression models were employed to investigate the association between service utilization and vulnerability and biological sex. Separate models were used to assess vulnerability specific to each developmental domain and vulnerability across multiple domains. The service utilization was compared between pre- and post-pandemic onset periods. Results The analysis reveals a significant decrease in all health services utilization from 2016 to 2019, followed by an increase until 2022. Vulnerable children had, on average, more events than non-vulnerable children. There was a consistent linear increase in mental health-related utilization from 2016 to 2022, with male children consistently experiencing higher utilization rates than females, particularly among vulnerable children. Specifically, there was a consistent linear increase in the utilization of anxiety-related services by children from 2016 to 2022, with females having, on average, 25 more events than males. The utilization of ADHD-related services showed different patterns for each group, with vulnerable male children having more utilization than their peers. Conclusion Utilizing population-wide data, our study reveals sex specific developmental vulnerabilities and its impact on children’s mental health service utilization during the COVID-19 pandemic, contributing to the existing literature. With data from kindergarten, we emphasize the need for early and targeted intervention strategies, especially for at-risk children, offering a path to reduce the burden of childhood mental health disorders.
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 | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.175 | 0.048 |
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".