Factors associated with the use of intrusive measures at a tertiary care facility for children and youth with mental health and developmental disabilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study seeks to identify some of the explanatory factors associated with the use of intrusive measures among children with mental health and developmental disabilities in psychiatric facilities. Intrusive intervention data were collected using an organizational database that was developed internally at a tertiary care facility. The sample was composed of 338 children/youth aged between 6 and 18 years (mean = 12.33, standard deviation = 2.70) admitted within a 2-year period. Logistic regression was used to examine the relationship between chemical restraint, physical restraint and secure isolation, and programme type after controlling for demographic and other relevant client characteristics. The study found that the number of chemical restraints and secure isolations was higher for clients with developmental disabilities than for clients with mental health, whereas the number of physical restraints was lower for clients with developmental disabilities than clients with mental health issues. Demographic variables also predicted specific types of intrusive measures. The results of this study outline the differential factors associated with specific types of intrusive measures to control aggressive and self-harm behaviours. The paper also outlines cultural change initiatives, organizational interventions, and policy implications for best practice services for children/youth in psychiatric facilities to further reduce intrusive measures.
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".