MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7026529927

Anxiety and Family Functioning: An Examination of Factors Associated with Mental Health Service Complexity for Clinically Referred Children and Youth

2025· article· en· W7026529927 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarship@Western (Western University) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEthics, Aesthetics, and Art
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthPsychosocialAnxietyMental health serviceInterpersonal communicationInterpersonal relationship
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: Service complexity refers to the intensity of services an individual needs, influenced by mental health and psychosocial factors. Anxiety is a prevalent mental health condition affecting youth. This study examined the relationship between anxiety and other risk factors—family functioning and interpersonal trauma and polyvictimization—with service complexity while controlling for age and sex. Method: A secondary analysis was conducted using data obtained from interRAI Child and Youth Mental Health (ChYMH) assessments from Canadian mental health agencies. The sample was comprised of 26,800 youth aged 4–18 years old, who were assessed by trained professionals. Results: Higher anxiety, family functioning concerns, and interpersonal trauma were all associated with increased service complexity. Conclusion: The findings of this study highlight the importance of addressing mental health, family, social and service variables when examining mental health utilization across multiple care settings.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.233
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.099 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholarship@Western (Western University)Same topicEthics, Aesthetics, and ArtFrench-language works237,207