Assessing the Outcome of Compulsory Treatment Orders on Management of Psychiatric Patients at 2 McGill University- Associated Hospitals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Some literature suggests that compulsory community treatment orders (CTOs) are effective in reducing hospitalizations in a subgroup of psychiatric patients with histories of repeated hospitalization, allowing them to be treated in the community under less restrictive measures. However, studies have yielded contradictory findings, in part because of methodological differences. Our study examines the effectiveness of CTOs in reducing hospitalizations and increasing community tenure of such patients. METHOD: The sample included all psychiatric patients who had been given a CTO during a 9-year period at 2 of McGill University's hospitals. This is a naturalistic, observational, retrospective, before-and-after study where patients acted as their own control subjects. We examined variables, including the number, duration, and time to psychiatric admissions, comparing 4 time periods: early, pre-index, index (when the first CTO was in force), and post-index periods. The total study duration per subject encompasses the longest period of observation within existing studies in Canada. RESULTS: Psychiatric patients with histories of frequent readmissions demonstrated a significant reduction in their number of hospitalizations as well as an increase in the median time to re-hospitalization, during the period when they were treated under a CTO. This effect of CTO was sustained even after the CTO had expired. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that CTOs are effective in assisting psychiatric patients with histories of repeated hospitalizations to live and be treated in the community, diminishing the occurrence of frequent hospitalization.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".