Measuring outcomes in a child psychiatry inpatient unit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this article is to examine clinical outcomes in a child psychiatry inpatient unit using dedicated measures. Clinicians completed contextual (Paddington Complexity Scale - PCS) and clinical change (Health of the Nation Outcome Scales for Children and Adolescents - HoNOSCA) questionnaires on admission and discharge for consecutive admissions to the unit between 1999 and 2007 (n=167). Mean changes in HoNOSCA scores were analysed, and the predictors of HoNOSCA mean change were assessed using regression analysis. The results showed that the mean length of stay at the unit was 5.6 months (SD 3.1). PCS ratings identified high total, clinical, and environmental complexity scores. HoNOSCA ratings indicated high levels of psychological problems on admission and significant improvement at discharge (mean change 7.7 (SD 6.7)). Greater positive change was associated with higher initial HoNOSCA scores, diagnoses other than conduct disorder and schizophrenia, and a facilitative parental attitude. The authors conclude that the systematic use of standardised outcome measures in child psychiatric inpatient units is useful to document clinical features, complexity and clinical change.
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 | 0.000 | 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".