Comparative analysis of pathways to early intervention services and duration of untreated psychosis in two Canadian cities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: Understanding pathways to early intervention services for psychosis in the local context is crucial, as the structure and organization of services need to be considered. This study compared pathways to early intervention services in two Canadian cities. METHODS: Data on pathways to care and duration of untreated psychosis were collected from 171 people admitted to early intervention services in Toronto (n = 150) and Hamilton (n = 21). We compared the cities on several indicators of pathway to care and duration of untreated psychosis. RESULTS: Pathways to care were more complex in Toronto, where people saw a greater number of health care services (median = 6, interquartile range = 3-9) than those in Hamilton (median = 3, IQR = 1-4). General practitioner involvement was higher in Toronto (56.0% vs. 33.3%). We did not find differences in the median duration of untreated psychosis. CONCLUSIONS: Pathways to early intervention services could be streamlined, and general practitioners may be a target for strategies to improve pathways to care.
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 | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".