A review of the outcomes of the recommendations made during paediatric telepsychiatry consultations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Little is known about whether the recommendations made during telepsychiatry are actually implemented. We reviewed 100 telepsychiatry consultations, chosen randomly from a paediatric telepsychiatry programme serving rural communities in Ontario. Treatment recommendations had been made for each case reviewed and up to nine recommendations had been made for a single case. Twenty-seven percent of recommendations revolved around monitoring (10%), changing (9%), starting (4%), continuing (3%) and stopping (1%) medication. Case managers associated with 54 of the cases were interviewed to determine whether the recommendations had been implemented and to examine the barriers and facilitators to implementation. The results indicated that cooperation of both child and parent, clear communication of recommendations, involvement of the school and local health providers, stability of the agencies and availability of services were key components in the successful implementation of recommendations. The matter of technology or technological difficulties acting as a barrier to telepsychiatric consultations was not mentioned by case managers, suggesting that it was not a problem.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".