MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2736772755 · doi:10.1177/070674370505000120

A Renewed Interest in Day Treatment

2005· letter· en· W2736772755 on OpenAlexaffvenue
John S. Ogrodniczuk, Paul Ian Steinberg

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · 2005
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
Canadian institutionsAlberta Hospital Edmonton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dear Editor: Day treatment, a form of partial hospitalization, can be helpful for patients who do not require inpatient care but who may benefit from more intensive care than is possible for outpatients. It differs from other forms of partial hospitalization (that is, day hospital and day care) in that it emphasizes both treatment and rehabilitation. Treatment is concerned with alleviating symptoms and recovery from illness. Rehabilitation focuses on the patient's adapting to a disability and facilitates adaptive functioning in the community. Historically, day treatment programs were offered to patients who were in some degree of remission from acute psychotic illness or to patients who suffered from long-term disorders (for example, personality disorders). Day treatment was viewed as superior to outpatient care because it provides more intensive treatment and rehabilitation. It experienced considerable use from the 1950s to the late 1980s. However, day treatment declined in the 1990s owing to inadequate funding arrangements and a move toward assertive community treatments. Recently, this trend has reversed. Contributing to the renewed growth of day treatment is the recognition that, while many currently available treatments effectively reduce symptomatology, they often have minimal impact on functional impairments. This has contributed to high rates of relapse and recurrence. Multimodal treatments that focus on reducing illness and enhancing functional capacity are believed to offer an optimal intervention approach. Day treatment is seen as satisfying this need. It offers intensive and structured clinical services within a stable therapeutic milieu that typically incorporates group psychotherapy, biological psychiatry, milieu principles, and a systems orientation. Many of the day treatment programs that have recently evolved differ from those used in the past. The newer day treatment programs are short-term (ranging from 3 to 12 weeks), whereas historically, day treatment lasted for several months. In addition, rather than being psychodynamically based, many of the new programs are guided by the principals of cognitive-behavioural therapy; nearly all new programs incorporate some insight-oriented interventions. Finally, the application of day treatment has expanded beyond the patient populations it served in the past. It is now being used for mood disorders (1), obsessive-compulsive disorder (2), postnatal depression (3), eating disorders (4), and substance abuse disorders (5). …

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0200.035
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.004

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations4
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry→Same topicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments→French-language works237,207→