Child and Adolescent Emergency and Urgent Mental Health Delivery Through Telepsychiatry: 12-Month Prospective Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The significant gap between children and adolescents presenting for emergency mental healthcare and the shortage of child and adolescent psychiatrists constitutes a major barrier to timely access for psychiatric assessment for rural and remote areas. Unlike remote areas, urban emergency departments have in-house psychiatric consultation. Telepsychiatry may be a solution to ensure the same service for remote areas. However, there is a paucity of studies on the use of telepsychiatry for child and adolescent emergency consults. Thus, the aim of our study was to (1) assess patient satisfaction with telepsychiatry and (2) compare clinical characteristics and outcome of telepsychiatry with face-to-face emergency child and adolescent assessments. METHODS: This is a prospective study of telepsychiatry emergency assessments of children and adolescents referred by emergency physicians. The comparison group was age- and gender-matched patients seen for face-to-face urgent assessments. Data were gathered on demographic and clinical variables. Telepsychiatry satisfaction was assessed using a questionnaire. Descriptive statistics and chi-square tests were used to assess group differences for each variable. Logistic regression was used to assess impact of the variables on outcome after the consult. A p value <0.05 was used to determine statistical significance. RESULTS: Sixty (n = 60) assessments were conducted through telepsychiatry in 12 months. Among the telepsychiatry group, Aboriginal patients were over-represented (50% vs. 6.7%, p < 0.001), a higher proportion received a diagnosis of adjustment disorder (22% vs. 8.3%, p = 0.004) or no diagnosis (27% vs. 6.7%, p = 0.004) compared with controls. There was no statistically significant difference between groups on other clinical variables. Patients reported a high degree of satisfaction with telepsychiatry. CONCLUSIONS: Telepsychiatry is acceptable to patients and families for safe emergency assessment and follow-up, reducing unnecessary travel to urban centers. Longer time outcomes are needed to establish validity of telepsychiatry for emergency assessments.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".