12 Access to paediatric maltreatment services through a northern community hospital
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background Few studies have evaluated how paediatric maltreatment services based in community hospitals can provide access to care for populations who live far away from tertiary centres. The Violence Intervention Prevention Program (VIPP) and the Paediatric Abuse and Referral Evaluation (PARE) clinic based in a northern community hospital in Canada offer assessment for sexual and physical maltreatment. Objectives The aim of the study was to describe demographic and clinical characteristics of patients accessing VIPP and PARE services and to characterize the length of time required to access care. Design/Methods We conducted a retrospective chart review of patients, under 16 years of age, who attended PARE clinic for initial consultation between 2017-2019. Analyses were descriptive. This work was approved by the research ethics board at our hospital. There are no funding disclosures. Results Of 164 patients, 62.2% were female; 37.8% male. The mean age was 6.6 years, ranging from 1 month to 15.9 years. 54.3% of referrals were for suspected physical maltreatment, 44.4% for suspected sexual maltreatment and 1.2% for both. 87.5% of patients listed home addresses within the hospital’s city limits. The maximum distance travelled from home to access care was 171 km. 87.2% of patients presented through the emergency department; a minority presented through direct referral to outpatient services (11.5%) or through inpatient (1.2%). When called from the emergency department, on-call VIPP nurses responded within a mean of 32 minutes for initial assessment. These patients received a maltreatment assessment by a paediatrician through the PARE clinic a mean of 14.3 days later. If patients did not present through the emergency department, the mean wait time for a maltreatment assessment by a paediatrician was 16 days. 13.4% (22/164) required referral to other medical or multidisciplinary services. General paediatrics (11/22) was the most frequent referral, followed by community speech programs (5/22). A minority (3.0%) of cases required consultation with external maltreatment teams, where two cases were peer-reviewed with a tertiary care team, one with a paediatric maltreatment physician at another community hospital and two cases were reviewed with a paediatric tertiary care radiologist. Conclusion Our results suggest that community-based paediatric maltreatment services provide care for our regional northern population. There is timely on-call access to allied-health providers through the emergency department. All patients were able to be assessed locally and none were required to travel to a tertiary care hospital. Further study is needed to assess how our data compares to other community maltreatment programs.
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 | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,013 | 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 ».