Improving the Psychiatric Knowledge, Skills, and Attitudes of Primary Care Physicians, 1950–2000: A Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The authors reviewed the literature on mental health education for primary care physicians and made recommendations for the design of educational programs and research. METHOD: They searched the MEDLINE and PsycLIT databases from 1950 to 2000 by using a variety of key words and subjects. RESULTS: More than 400 articles were identified, ranging from empirical studies to philosophical articles. Many identified a perceptual gap between primary care and psychiatry as the basis for problems of contextual relevance in psychiatric education for primary care practitioners. There were few empirical studies; most reported only results of satisfaction surveys or simple tests of knowledge. Long-term outcomes were less positive; there were important negative findings. CONCLUSIONS: An extensive literature published over five decades identified a strong need for ongoing mental health training for primary care physicians. Helpful recommendations exist related to objectives, methods, and evaluation. However, there are organizational and attitudinal issues that may be equally or more important for educators to consider than the selection of educational methods.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".