Psychiatry at night: experience of the senior house officer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aims and Method We gathered detailed prospective data for first on-call activity of senior house officers (SHOs) in order to help plan changes in service provision so that SHOs in psychiatry complied with the Working Time Directive and to determine whether service changes affected training experience while on call. The incumbent SHOs designed a simple form to monitor on-call activity in West Berkshire. Results Admissions and assessments make up a quarter of calls but three-quarters of the work. An overnight crisis service reduced the number of assessments made by SHOs out of hours by 68%. Screening of calls by a senior nurse reduced the number of calls about in-patients by 60% on weekday nights. Between 73% and 100% of calls about in-patients after midnight were for assessment of patients in seclusion and rapid tranquillisation. Clinical Implications This survey helped to plan service delivery and to monitor the training of SHOs during on call. Screening of calls by a senior nurse, alternatives to seclusion and nurse-led prescribing for rapid tranquillisation would have the largest impact on the work generated by in-patients. The overnight crisis service reduced the number of assessments, but might have an adverse impact on training.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".