Factors that contributed to Ontario adults’ mental health during the first 16 months of the COVID-19 pandemic: a decision tree analysisNo Title
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic has negatively impacted the mental health of individuals globally. However, less is known about the characteristics that contributed to some people having mental health problems during the pandemic, while others did not. Mental health problems can be understood on a continuum, ranging from acute (e.g., depression following a stressful event) to severe (e.g., chronic conditions that disrupt everyday functioning). Therefore, the purpose of this article was to generate profiles of adults who were more or less at risk for the development of mental health problems, in general, during the first 16-months of the COVID-19 pandemic in Ontario, Canada. Data were collected via online surveys at two time points: April-July 2020 and July-August 2021; 2,188 adults (Mage = 43.15 years; SD = 8.82) participated. Surveys included a demographic questionnaire and four previously validated tools to measure participants’ mental health, subjective wellbeing, physical activity and sedentary behaviour, and sleep. A decision tree was generated at each time point for those with mental health problems, and those with no mental health problems. Results showed that subjective wellbeing was the biggest contributor to mental health status. Characteristics associated with no mental health problems among adults included having good wellbeing, being a good sleeper (quantity, quality, and patterns of sleep), and being over the age of 42. Characteristics associated with mental health problems included having poor wellbeing and being a poor sleeper. Findings revealed that specific characteristics interacted to contribute to adults’ mental health status during the first 16 months of the COVID-19 pandemic. Given that wellbeing was the biggest contributor to mental health, researchers should focus on targeting adults’ wellbeing to improve their mental health during future health crises.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".