MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2215334003 · doi:10.1097/nmd.0000000000000441

Severity of Needs Among Individuals With Severe Mental Disorders

2015· article· en· W2215334003 on OpenAlexafffund
Marie‐Josée Fleury, Guy Grenier, Jean-Marie Bamvita

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAdolescent and Pediatric Healthcare
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityDouglas Mental Health University InstituteDouglas College
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsDisadvantagedMedicineMental illnessNeeds assessmentMental healthPsychiatryPsychologyClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims to assess (1) changes in severity of needs among 204 individuals with severe mental disorders (SMD) at 5-year follow-up and (2) predictors of the overall change in severity of needs. Severity of needs in 26 areas was compared at three different times. A repeated mixed design ANOVA model was used to assess predictors of the overall change in severity. Over the 5-year period, the severity of needs decreased significantly in five areas and increased significantly in only one. Predictors of overall change in severity of needs were related mostly to clinical and healthcare service variables (e.g., schizophrenia, without substance abuse disorder, efficient social functioning, high amount and adequacy of help, and continuity of care). To better respond to needs, healthcare services should focus on more disadvantaged individuals with SMD and dual diagnosis, especially those who require basic education and help in securing food.

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)0.002
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.313 · 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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Nervous and Mental DiseaseSame topicAdolescent and Pediatric HealthcareFrench-language works237,207