MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Emergency department from the mental health client’s perspective

2007· article· en· W2047930613 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Mental Health Nursing · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEmergency and Acute Care Studies
Canadian institutionsWinnipeg Regional Health AuthorityBrandon UniversityUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthPerspective (graphical)Presentation (obstetrics)Emergency departmentDistressMental distressNursingPsychiatryMedicineNorm (philosophy)PsychologyClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

General hospital emergency departments (EDs) are obvious places for individuals in psychiatric distress or a mental health crisis to seek assistance. However, the typical mental health presentation does not fit with the treatment norm of most EDs creating a tension around the care of individuals with mental illnesses. Eight focus groups were held with mental health patients and their families to determine their satisfaction with care received in regional EDs with particular emphasis on their evaluation of the role of the psychiatric emergency nurse. Themes identified were: waiting in the ED, attitudes of treatment staff, diagnostic overshadowing, 'no where else to go', family needs, and a wish list for ideal services. These issues are described in this paper along with clinical and systemic implications.

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 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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.587
Threshold uncertainty score0.700

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.390 · 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