The treatment of youth anxiety: Historical and current narratives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This master’s thesis is a qualitative analysis of youth mental health journeys in Atlantic Canada, asking how youth experience treatments in the mental health system. Participants (N=8), aged 13-18, identified with anxiety disorders and had sought services within the mental health system. Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with participants. Youth narrative summaries were presented providing rich youth perspectives in mental health research. A thematic analysis detailed both positive and negative experiences, which acted as facilitators and barriers for treatment often in contradictory forms. The central themes were: therapeutic relationships, treatment in school, medicalization, wait times, and being stuck in the margins. Communication and trust issues, a lack of comprehensive treatment options, and the complexity of navigating the system, pervaded the narratives. A social historical framework also informed the design, analysis, and findings of this thesis, which tracked the rise of anxiety in the twentieth century and contextualized current day treatments. This thesis has produced insights regarding the importance of youth perspectives in evaluating mental health care given the marginalization of these perspectives in past psychiatric discourses and present- day narratives.\nKeywords: youth, qualitative, anxiety, treatment, social history, mental health.
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 | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".