MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016606578 · doi:10.1016/s0924-9338(12)74473-5

P-306 - Adolescent day treatment program: outcomes and follow-up study

2012· article· en· W2016606578 on OpenAlexaffabout
C. Lakusta, C. Wilkes, Sonal Malhotra, G. Vaz, David Cawthorpe

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Psychiatry · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryCalgary Laboratory Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDay treatmentPsychologyPediatricsMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The Adolescent Day Treatment Program (ADTP) established in Summer 2000 in Calgary, Alberta, Canada provides multi-disciplinary non-residential day treatment for mentally disturbed youth aged 13 to 18 years who suffer from moderate to severe forms of mental health disorders that do not to require hospitalization or as a step-down from hospitalization. The treatment approach includes pharmaco-therapy, psychiatric consultation, psycho-educational groups, individual, group and family therapy, occupational and recreational therapy and school board-operated educational programming. Methods Data descriptions and repeated measure analyses included variables representing demographics, length of stay, diagnoses, admission and discharge problem severity, goal achievement ratings, and Children's Global Assessment Scale (CGAS). Results Significant improvement was observed over the course of treatment in the majority of patients in outcome measures (problem severity and goal achievement) and CGAS. Follow-up of a sub-sample of those served indicates that function at the time of discharge best predicts adaptation at the time of follow-up. Discussion Day treatment appears to be effective and clinical effects persists at the time of follow-up and are predicted primarily by discharge function.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.116
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.281 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean PsychiatrySame topicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207