Identification of Re-assessment Intervals to Support a Measurement Based Care (MBC) approach with the interRAI Community Mental Health (CMH) Assessment
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Mental health is a fundamental aspect of people’s health and is a leading cause of disability worldwide. Ineffectively treated mental health problems could result in a shorter life expectancy as a result of death by suicide or serious health problems. These could be improved with a proper treatment plan based on results from systematic assessments. Measuring quality of care is challenging worldwide and varies among organization due to the absence of standardize instruments and lack of ability to regularly collect data within the health care settings. The potential use of the interRAI Community Mental Health (CMH) assessment, as a measurement based care (MBC) instrument, generates data that help to adjust the care planning and resource allocation based on the identified changes in the client’s strengths, preferences, and need. However, further research is needed to identify the optimal re-assessment interval from the initial interRAI CMH assessment. \nObjective: This thesis investigated the relationship of time between initial assessment and re-assessment with rates of change in clients’ needs. \nMethods: This retrospective study used secondary data from interRAI CMH assessments completed on clients in Ontario, Canada between 2007 and 2020, which are stored on the interRAI Canada server at the University of Waterloo. A variety of statistical techniques were used to identify the shortest period of re-assessment time to see the meaningful rate of changes. \nResults: This study showed that DSI and PSS-Short scales are valid and reliable over time. The highest rate of change of 75.9% for the DSI was among clients who have been re-assessed within 3-6 months. On average, the rate of change for the DSI was 73.6. The most noticeable rate of change for the PSS-short scale was for clients who have been re-assessed after 6 months: 28.2% between 6-9 months, 25.9% between 9-12 months, and 27.6% after 12 months or more. On average, the rate of change for the PSS-short was 22.7%. The most noticeable rate of change of 14.8% for the traumatic life events CAP was for clients who have been re-assessed after 12 months or more. On average, the rate of change for the traumatic life events CAP was 10.9%. The best rate of improvement (46.7%) after the initial assessment were between 6-9 months and 9-12 months. The period of time when clients worsen their initial score to 20.0% was after 12 months from the initial assessment. \nConclusion: \nThrough a thorough analysis of the dataset, this study confirmed that existing re-assessment period of 6 month is appropriate. Understanding the benefits of MBC, specifically the interRAI instruments, in CMH settings makes decision makers to apply standardized measurement instruments to the service delivery to improve quality of care, healthcare outcome, to achieve clients’ goals at the end of the treatment, and to help clinicians to monitor clients’ treatment progress and address their changes appropriately by observing the symptoms on a regular basis.
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| 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 | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,004 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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 tête enseignante, 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 ».