Moving beyond policy rhetoric: building a moral community for early psychosis intervention
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has. Margaret Mead It has been my privilege to work in partnership with hundreds of patients experiencing emergent psychosis, in Hamilton, Ontario during the course of my lengthy nursing career. Indeed, the knowledge I have gleaned from both the courageous individuals who have experienced serious mental illness and their resilient families has been monumental. When I first began my career, I was utterly naïve and most certainly held the misguided assumption that to be a mental health nurse required an adherence to a strict set of nursing principles and that the nurse-patient relationship was approached from an objective and 'safe' distance. Reflecting on this now, many years later I understand that the therapeutic relationship between nurses and those they serve is foundational to the delivery of safe and ethical mental health care. Although increasingly clinical practice guidelines and evidence-based interventions serve to inform nursing practice, in my mind it is the embodied experience of relationship that is the real instrument of healing and transformation. Recognizing that early intervention provides an unprecedented opportunity to begin anew with young patients who have no prior experiences with the mental health care system, the purpose of this paper is to serve as a vehicle for discussion and potentially inspire a group of thoughtful, committed nurses to change the world of mental health services by creating a respectful moral community. I propose that relational ethics form the values and ideals of a fully humane early psychosis intervention community in Ontario. Using the foundational tenets of the nurse-patient relationship illustrated through the use of a clinical narrative, I will suggest ways that nurses can proactively take up the early intervention challenge and contribute to an overall culture of optimism and hope. Intervening early is simply not enough. We must first commit to developing comprehensive recovery-oriented treatments in a coordinated and thoughtful way.
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 | 0.116 | 0.152 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.035 | 0.094 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.036 | 0.034 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.033 |
| Research integrity | 0.023 | 0.038 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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".