Services intégrés pour les jeunes : vision des jeunes et des différents acteurs gravitant autour d’eux quant à leur santé globale et aux services
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Integrated youth services (IYS) bring together and integrate mental, physical, and social health services around the needs of excluded or marginalized youth. Although IYS are based on a holistic approach to the individual, health, and services, there is a lack of information on how such an approach is implemented in services. This article aims to document the views of young people and other stakeholders on the holistic approach for young people, based on evaluative research conducted at an IYS, the Aire ouverte – Estrie site (Quebec, Canada). This qualitative research is based on the triangulation of the perspectives of young people (photovoice) and the stakeholders around them (interviews with partners, practitioners, and parents). The results show a very broad vision of health as a whole, composed of different dimensions that interact and balance each other. Various factors influence their health: nature and climate change, technology, young people themselves, and their interpersonal relationships (social support). Finally, the results reveal problems with existing services, the vision of desired services, and five key strategies to prioritize for youth intervention. The discussion highlights the theoretical and practical implications of the holistic approach to youth health, the factors that influence it, and integrated services.
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 | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".