Liaison Psychiatry - a New Clinical Subspecialty?
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract The term expresses, on the one hand, the act of consultation, the psychiatric intervention intended for the patient and, on the other hand, it emphasizes the assistance given to the physicians and the therapeutic team treating the patients. Liaison psychiatry aims to become a new subspecialty of psychiatry whose purpose is to study and manage mental disorders in patients treated by other medical disciplines. The activities of liaison psychiatry involve: initial focus on the consultation of the admitted patient, extensive services with multidisciplinary personnel, offers for various hospital activities (e.g. emergency care) and specialties (e.g. obstetrics and oncology), services for specific medical problems requiring collaborative planning, training and the supervision of the medical team, liaison and consultation by the liaison team, an increased interest in the treatment of functional symptoms, activities for discharged patients, connections with primary care, training and supervision for clinical medical and surgical teams. Recent reviews of the literature suggest that liaison psychiatry will require determination and political abilities if it is to assume the role it plays in multidisciplinary medical care approaches. Key words: liaison psychiatry, activity, efficacy, perspectives The term of American origin expresses, on the one hand, the act of consultation, the psychiatric intervention intended for the patient and, on the other hand, it emphasizes the assistance given to the physicians and the therapeutic team treating the patients. The history of liaison psychiatry is rather recent. Its roots have obviously been influenced by the development of psychiatry, psychosomatics, clinical psychology, and by the presence of psychiatric units in general hospitals. As a result of the outcomes attained by units affiliated to liaison psychiatry and particularly due to Lipowski's efforts, starting with 1974, the importance of liaison psychiatry in the training of psychiatrists and physicians of other specialties has been widely recognized in the USA and Canada (Lipowski & Wise, 2002). Beginning with the 1960s-1970s, liaison psychiatry acquired credit in Europe, particularly in France, Switzerland, United Kingdom, Spain, Germany, Netherlands and Italy, which then extended to Australia, South America and New Zealand. Starting with the 1990s, the term liaison psychiatry has become widely used in the literature (Mayou, 2007). However, confusion persists regarding the objectives and the area of liaison psychiatry. Moreover, the term is considered ill-chosen by many psychiatrists, it has generated numerous discussions and conceptual polemics, and there are a number of different labels used in various countries. Thus, in some countries the term of psychosomatic medicine is preferred, in others psychological medicine, general psychiatry or behavioral medicine, all of which essentially reflect the areas covered by liaison psychiatry. The various terms reflect attempts of describing the objectives, the clinical problem, the specific population or the way in which the service is offered. The unsolved problem of terminology reflects the unsolved problem of the mind-body relationship, of the somatic-psychiatric symptoms relationship. In most, if not all, developed countries, there is a segregation of general health services and mental health services. In this context, the legitimate question arises regarding the extent to which psychosomatic medicine and liaison psychiatry overlap. Psychosomatic medicine has focused particularly on theoretical approaches of the mind-body relationship, highlighting the role of psychosocial factors in the onset of somatic diseases and of psychiatric interventions in their treatment. In its current meaning, the term psychosomatics designates somatic symptoms usually attributed to mental disorders of affective origin or of conflicting nature. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,007 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,009 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,007 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,005 | 0,007 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,009 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».