Effectiveness of Early Psychosis Intervention: Comparison of Service Users and Nonusers in Population-Based Health Administrative Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Early psychosis intervention (EPI) programs improve clinical and functional outcomes for people with first-episode psychosis. Less is known about the impact of these programs on the larger health care system. The authors sought to compare indicators of health service use, self-harm, suicide, and mortality between people with first-episode psychosis who were using EPI services and a propensity-matched group of concurrent control subjects who were not accessing EPI services. METHOD: A retrospective cohort of incident cases of nonaffective psychosis in the catchment area of the Prevention and Early Intervention Program for Psychoses in London, Ontario, between 1997 and 2013 was constructed using health administrative data. This cohort was linked to primary data from the same program to identify people who used EPI services. Outcomes for people who used EPI services and those who did not were compared using Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: People who used EPI services had substantially lower rates of all-cause mortality in the 2-year period after EPI program admission (hazard ratio=0.24, 95% CI=0.11-0.53), although a significant difference in self-harm (hazard ratio=0.86, 95% CI=0.18-4.24) and suicide (hazard ratio=0.73, 95% CI=0.29-1.80) between the two groups was not observed. Those who used EPI services also had lower rates of emergency department presentation (hazard ratio=0.71, 95% CI=0.60-0.83) but higher rates of hospitalization (hazard ratio=1.42, 95% CI=1.18-1.71). These benefits were not observed after 2 years, when EPI care is typically stepped down to medical management. CONCLUSIONS: People with first-episode psychosis who used EPI services had mortality rates that were four times lower than those with first-episode psychosis who did not use these services, as well as better outcomes across several health care system indicators. These findings support the effectiveness of EPI services for the treatment of first-episode psychosis in the larger context of the overall health care system.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".