MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2217130762

Frontline Providers of Mental Healthcare: The Role of Police Officers in Involuntary Psychiatric Assessments Under the Mental Health Care And Treatment Act

2010· article· en· W2217130762 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Jude Hall

Bibliographic record

VenueDalhousie journal of legal studies · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild Abuse and Trauma
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthContext (archaeology)Mental healthcareMental Health ActApprehensionOfficerHealth careLegislationNursingPsychologyStatutory lawPsychiatryMedicinePublic relationsPolitical scienceLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article advances the proposition that police officers in Newfoundland and Labrador are, and should be, viewed as frontline providers of mental healthcare services. A frontline provider of mental healthcare service could be defined as any person who in the performance of employment acts as a facilitator of initial delivery of mental healthcare for a consumer in need of such service. The central proposition requires qualification and context and is advanced through pursuit of the following research objectives: to assess the extent that variability in police officer mental health training programs may impact upon the performance of statutory duties of police officers under the Newfoundland Mental Health Care and Treatment Act; to provide insightful commentary; and, where possible, to highlight counterproductive issues in the advancement of the quality of service that police officers provide to consumers of mental healthcare services, particularly within the context of initial psychiatric assessments as provided for under the Act. The MHCTA is a broad and expansive piece of legislation governing the entire spectrum of involuntary mental healthcare, including initial assessment, involuntary admission, treatment, review and release of persons back into the community. The scope of this article is limited primarily to the role prescribed to police officers under the Act. As such, the article centres on the process and procedures surrounding apprehension and conveyance of a person to a medical facility for initial psychiatric assessment.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.753
Threshold uncertainty score0.491

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0180.013
Scholarly communication0.0090.006
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0060.009
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.332 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDalhousie journal of legal studiesSame topicChild Abuse and TraumaFrench-language works237,207