International Journal of Clinical Psychiatry and Mental Health, 2013, 1, 33-40 33 Relative Deprivation and Mental Health in Canadian Adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: Prior research on social class differences in adult mental illness suggests that relative differences in affluence impact mental health and well-being more than absolute affluence. However, it is unclear whether relative deprivation also relates to adolescent mental health and to both internalizing and externalizing dimensions of mental health. This study examined the association between relative deprivation in schools and mental health in a community sample of 26,069 adolescent participants of the Canadian Health Behaviour in School-aged Children (HBSC) study. School-based surveys measured five dimensions of mental health and well-being: internalizing symptoms, externalizing symptoms, positive well-being, prosocial behaviour and life satisfaction. Regression analyses found that relative deprivation positively related to internalizing problems and negatively related to well-being and life satisfaction after differences in absolute affluence were held constant. However, relative deprivation did not relate to externalizing dimensions of mental health (externalizing symptoms and prosocial behaviour). These findings extend epidemiological evidence of links between income inequality and internalizing psychopathology to adolescent populations and underscore the influential role of socioeconomic status in adolescent health. Suggestions for future research and the practical implications of the findings are discussed.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".