MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Integrating an evidence‐based intervention into clinical practice: ‘transitional relationship model’

2012· article· en· W2143973984 on OpenAlexaff
C. FORCHUK, Mary‐Lou Martin, Elmo Jensen, Susan Ouseley, Patricia A. Sealy, Georgiana Beal, W. Reynolds, Siobhan Sharkey

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMental Health and Patient Involvement
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WindsorSt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonYork UniversityMcMaster UniversityProfessional Engineers OntarioLawson Health Research InstituteWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionDocumentationFocus groupNursingFeelingTransitional careIntervention (counseling)Peer supportMedicineQualitative researchPsychologyHealth careMedical educationSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accessible summary The transitional relationship model (TRM) facilitates the discharge of psychiatric clients from hospital to community by providing hospital staff involvement until a therapeutic relationship has been established with a community care provider as well as peer support. Psychiatric wards at six hospital sites implemented the TRM in three waves. Monthly summaries, progress reports, meeting minutes and focus group discussions were reviewed in order to uncover facilitators and barriers to TRM implementation. Factors that facilitated TRM implementation included: educational modules for staff and peer training, the presence of on‐site champions, and supportive documentation systems. Barriers included: feeling swamped/overwhelmed, death by process, team dynamics and changes in champions. Implementation strategies suggested by the initial hospital wards were used to enhance implementation on subsequent wards, leading to positive outcomes. This study highlights the need to address work environment issues when implementing healthcare interventions, particularly for interprofessional teams. Abstract The transitional relationship model (TRM) facilitates the discharge process by providing peer support and hospital staff involvement until a therapeutic relationship has been established with a community care provider. A quasi‐experimental, action‐oriented research design was employed in which psychiatric wards at six hospital sites implemented the model in three waves. Helpful strategies were identified by each wave of wards for consideration by subsequent wards. Using an ethnographic approach, qualitative data were examined to uncover experiences and perceptions of TRM implementation and to help identify key issues that were supporting or hampering implementation. Specific strategies that facilitate the implementation of TRM include: (1) the use of educational modules for on‐ward hospital staff training and peer training; (2) presence of on‐site champions; and (3) supportive documentation systems. Issues identified as barriers to implementation included: (1) feeling drowned, swamped and overwhelmed; (2) death by process; (3) team dynamics; and (4) changes in champions. Staged large‐scale implementation of the TRM allowed for iterative improvements to the model leading to positive outcomes. This study highlights the need to address work environment issues, particularly interprofessional teams.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.317
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.396
GPT teacher head0.594
Teacher spread0.198 · 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.

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

Citations41
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Psychiatric and Mental Health NursingSame topicMental Health and Patient InvolvementFrench-language works237,207