MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029829693 · doi:10.1176/appi.ps.201200474

Mode of Entry to an Early Intervention Service for Psychotic Disorders: Determinants and Impact on Outcome

2013· article· en· W2029829693 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Shamira Pira, Georges M. Durr, Nicole Pawliuk, Ridha Joober, Ashok Malla

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychiatric Services · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsDouglas Mental Health University Institute
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)Outcome (game theory)PsychiatryService (business)PsychologyMedicineBusinessEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Specialized early intervention services for first-episode psychosis should treat a proportion of patients without using inpatient beds. This study compared such service users by their initial mode of treatment before entry-inpatient (N=157) or outpatient (N=102). METHODS: On entry to a Montreal early intervention service, the groups were compared on baseline clinical and functional variables and on hospitalizations during two years of treatment. RESULTS: Initial presentation at an emergency service, shorter duration of untreated psychosis, lower functioning level, and aggressive and bizarre behavior were associated with the inpatient entry mode to early intervention services. During follow-up, individuals entering as inpatients spent more days hospitalized than those entering as outpatients, and their time to rehospitalization was shorter. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that entry into early intervention services via the hospital emergency department and presentation with behavioral and functional disturbances were more predictive than core psychotic symptoms of hospital inpatient status on referral to an early intervention service.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.738

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)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.354 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations7
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychiatric ServicesSame topicSchizophrenia research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207