Planning for Sustainability of an Evidence‐Based Mental Health Promotion Program in Canadian Elementary Schools
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Substantial research illuminates many factors effecting the implementation of evidence-based mental health promotion programs in schools; however, research on how schools plan for sustaining their investments in these programs is limited. In this qualitative study, we elicited descriptions of opportunities and challenges for sustainability. We interviewed 24 individuals from schools involved in a longitudinal, qualitative research project that followed uptake and implementation of the evidence-based WITS Programs across 2 years (Leadbeater et al. 2012). WITS stands for Walk away, Ignore, Talk it out and Seek help and the online WITS Programs focus on preventing peer victimization ( www.witsprograms.ca ). Our findings suggest that sustainability planning in schools is not merely a next step following high quality implementation, but rather involves multiple ongoing processes that need to be anticipated and supported by school leadership and program champions and developers in order to realize investments in evidence-based programs.
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.
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 | 0.013 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 it