The Mood Disorders Association of British Columbia Psychiatric Urgent Care Program: A Preliminary Evaluation of a Suggested Alternative Model of Outpatient Psychiatric Care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe an alternative model of psychiatric outpatient care for patients with mood and anxiety disorders (the Mood Disorders Association of British Columbia Psychiatric Urgent Care Program or the MDA Program) using group medical visits (GMV) and (or) email communications in lieu of individual follow-up appointments. METHOD: Annual costs of the MDA Program were compared with average costs of private psychiatrists offering outpatient care and patients being treated in a mental health centre. In addition, questionnaires as to patient satisfaction with the MDA Program intake, GMV experience, and family physician satisfaction with the MDA Program were administered. RESULTS: The MDA Program model of care is significantly more cost effective than individual psychiatric outpatient care or health authority mental health centre care for patients with moderate or severe illness. Patients and family physicians were very satisfied with the model of care and GMVs offered. CONCLUSIONS: The MDA Program model of care appears to be efficient and cost-effective, and patients and referring physicians appear satisfied with the care offered in this program.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".