Recent developments in person-centered psychiatry: present and future psychiatric rehabilitation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Psychiatric Rehabilitation (PSR) focuses on person-centered and evidence-based sets of mental healthcare practices that facilitate the recovery of people with mental health challenges. PSR aims to enhance and maintain adaptive skills and supports for personally meaningful and valued social roles. Research in PSR continues to progress, with growing knowledge and evidence to support PSR practices and the provision of mental health services within a recovery-oriented framework. As one of the more person-centered sets of healthcare practices, a periodic review of recent and developing PSR literature is warranted for its own sake and for the consideration of how lessons from PSR may be transferable to other areas of healthcare. Recent developments and future directions in PSR addressed here relate to (1) enhanced conceptual understanding of recovery, (2) increased understanding of how individuals and families cope with mental illness, (3) PSR ethics, (4) increasing use of technology in PSR practices, (5) integration of evidence-based and promising practices, (6) psychiatric leisure rehabilitation and (7) PSR education and systems. These areas of focus are discussed in a selective review of the literature and a clinical case example which illustrates how PSR practices can facilitate recovery.
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 | 0.013 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".