Piloting Violence and Incident Reporting Measures on one Acute Mental Health Inpatient Unit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During May, 2006, on one acute mental health inpatient unit, nursing staff evaluated each patient three times a day (i.e., once each nursing shift) using the Broset Violence Checklist (BVC). Associated data were collected using the Staff Observation and Aggression Scale-Revised (SOAS-R) if an adverse incident occurred. At the end of the data collection period, the nursing staff were asked to complete a short questionnaire anonymously to evaluate how useful they had found the instruments. N = 93 patients were admitted to the unit during the month of study. Seven incidents were reported using the SOAS-R. A slight trend was noted for higher BVC score in aggressive patients. A potential high occurrence of underreporting on incidents was observed. There was limited feedback data from nursing staff at the end of the study, but the responses received were encouraging for continued use of the instruments in practice. The pilot study fulfilled its purpose in two ways. First, it allowed staff on the unit to experience using structured instruments to support their practice. Second, it allowed an opportunity to raise awareness of potential underreporting and tolerance of aggression on the unit.
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 | 0.003 | 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 | 0.003 | 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".