MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2184686209 · doi:10.1177/070674370304800511

Time of Day Influences Nonattendance at Urgent Short-Term Mental Health Unit in Victoria, British Columbia

2003· article· en· W2184686209 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Rivian Weinerman, VI Glossop, Randy Wong, Lara R. Robinson, Karen White, Rif Kamil

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Operations and Scheduling Optimization
Canadian institutionsIsland Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAttendanceMental healthMedicineIncidence (geometry)Names of the days of the weekPsychologyPsychiatryDemographyPediatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To identify the patient profile of first-time no-shows (FTNS) and to examine which process variables predict FTNS. METHOD: We developed a questionnaire exploring vriables that might impact attendance. Of 779 referrals over 9 months, all FTNS (n = 60) and a sample of randomly selected control subjects (n = 60) completed the questionnaire. RESULTS: The FTNS rate was 7.7%. A set of 10 variables predicted FTNS at 80% accuracy. Most significant was our finding that "time of day of first appointment" showed a novel and practical difference between FTNS and control subjects. Patients were 3.6 times more likely to show for first appointments scheduled in the afternoon. CONCLUSIONS: Simply making first appointments in the afternoon could significantly decrease FTNS incidence.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.131
Threshold uncertainty score0.264

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations14
Published2003
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of PsychiatrySame topicHealthcare Operations and Scheduling OptimizationFrench-language works237,207