A Systematized Review of Youth Mental Health Courts: An Evaluation of the Courts' Operations and Outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study I reviewed the Canadian and international published literature examining youth mental health courts to provide an overview of their processes, mechanisms of change, and outcomes. A systematized literature review was conducted using the PRISMA-ScR checklist as a guideline following a search of PsychINFO, ERIC, ASSIA, MEDLINE, Sociological Abstracts, Social Services Abstracts, Criminal Justice Abstracts with Full Text, and Child and Adolescent Studies databases. Inclusion criteria stipulated that studies be original research, and examine at least one aspect of the courts’ operations or outcomes. Twenty articles satisfied inclusion criteria. Results showed considerable similarities among intake, referral and case monitoring procedures across courts, and recidivism outcomes. Youth reported courts to be collaborative and supportive, with stakeholders reporting reduced case processing times, improved access to treatment services and reduced recidivism. I highlight findings on operations and outcomes of youth mental health courts that have important implications for policy and practice.
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 | 0.105 | 0.252 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.057 | 0.058 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".