A Comparison of Medical and Psychobehavioral Emergency Department Visits Made by Adults with Intellectual Disabilities
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Study Objective. We describe and contrast medical to psychobehavioral emergency visits made by a cohort of adults with intellectual disabilities. Methods. This was a study of 221 patients with intellectual disabilities who visited the emergency department because of a psychobehavioral or medical emergency. Patient profiles are described and logistic regression was used to assess predictors of psychobehavioral emergencies in this group, including age, residence, psychiatric diagnosis, cognitive level, and life events. Results. Ninety-eight individuals had medical emergencies and 123 individuals presented with psychobehavioral emergencies. The most common medical issue was injury and the most common psychobehavioral issue was aggression. In the multivariate analysis, life events (odds ratio (OR) 0.28; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.10 to 0.75), psychiatric diagnosis (OR 2.35; 95% CI 1.12 to 4.95), and age group (OR 4.97; 95% CI 1.28 to 19.38) were associated with psychobehavioral emergencies. Psychobehavioral emergencies were more likely to result in admission and caregivers reported lower rates of satisfaction with these visits. Conclusion. Emergency departments would benefit from greater understanding of the different types of presentations made by adults with intellectual disabilities, given the unique presentations and outcomes associated with them.
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.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.151 | 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 it