L’intervention de crise dans un établissement hospitalier : aspects théoriques et pratiques
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper explores the rationale for establishing a crisis intervention service in a psychiatric hospital setting. After reviewing the pertinent literature, a description will be provided for a crisis service that has been operating since 1987 in the psychiatric department of a general hospital. Data collected over a 6 month period will be presented in order to examine the types of patients referred to the service, the length of stay on the service and the follow-up. Our findings indicate that a large proportion of the patients referred to the service are diagnosed as having major psychiatric disorders and require some form of medical intervention. Nevertheless, a group of patients could be identified who benefit from traditional crisis intervention and who after receiving circumscribed treatment, require no hospital follow-up. The data will be utilized to outline the various roles that a crisis service can play in a psychiatric institution. The discussion will also focus on the structure and functioning of the service and its potential impact on the rest of the system.
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 | 0.030 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.075 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.015 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".