Reorganization based on patient focused care programs, in the context of mental health services reform: Effects on patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background WHO (2001) suggested that the population should get easier and faster access to services improvements in the management of mental disorders in primary health care. In this context, the Government of Quebec (Canada) published in 2005 a Mental Health Action Plan, based on an organization into a hierarchy and some hospitals began to reorganize their mental health services into patient focused care programs. Aims of the study The presentation will focus on the effects on outpatients (N = 290) who were receiving mental health services from two hospitals in Montreal. Methods As part of a broader study on mental health services and patient outcomes, mental health services’ patients from a psychiatric hospital and a general university hospital in Montreal, were recruited to complete the Basis24, Euroqol, SF12 and other scales. A standard recruitment protocol was followed. All incoming patients at the outpatient clinics/programs during a typical week were considered eligible. This procedure was done before the reorganization of services, in 2006 (T1), and after the reorganization of services (T2; 2 years later), in 2008. We used T-test to assess the difference of a six-month evolution between the two-time measures. Results Respectively, 1057 (T1) and 557 (T2) participated to the project. Generally patients showed no significative differences between the two times in their symptoms, functioning and QOL. Only some marginal aspects changes in one site or another. Conclusion Patients were not very disturbed by changes and the new program were not fully implemented two years after T1.
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".