Establishing Best Practice in Pediatric Emergency Mental Health
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this prospective study were to determine the demographic and clinical characteristics of children and youth presenting to the emergency department (ED) for mental health concerns through the use of a valid standardized assessment protocol. METHODS: Children and adolescents, 8 to 17 years, who presented to an ED-based crisis intervention program during fiscal years 2005 to 2006, completed self-report measures of depression, anxiety, and behavior. Clinicians completed the childhood acuity of psychiatric illness based on their assessment. RESULTS: The clinician ratings indicated that 93.1% of the sample had at least 1 risk behavior or clinical symptom in the moderate/severe range. Admittance rate for the sample was 17.9% (low-risk admissions, 5.8%; high-risk deflections, 9%). Significant differences were found in presentations by sex and age as follows: (1) female youths (12-17 years) were more likely than male youth to report clinically significant depressive symptoms and to present with suicidal ideation/gesture and self-injury. (2) Male youths (12-17 years) were more likely to present with aggression to people/objects than female youth. (3) Male children younger than 12 years were more likely to present with high activity level than female children. Self-report measures (depression, anxiety, and behavior) corelated with corresponding clinician ratings. CONCLUSIONS: This research, through the use of a multi-informant standardized assessment protocol, presents a comprehensive study of children and youth presenting to the ED with mental health issues. Identifying the clinical characteristics of this population is an important first step toward establishing best practice within an ED.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.125 | 0.222 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.008 | 0.014 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".