Transition of adolescent students with bipolar disorder from hospital to receiving schools, the educational aftercare planning process
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Youth who develop Bipolar Disorder have widely varied patterns of school functioning that are reflective of individual cognitive and affective status during each recovery stage. Since the likelihood of a student with Bipolar Disorder being hospitalized at some point is very high, and lengths of hospitalization can range from weeks to years, the educational needs of these ill youth must be considered while in hospital. When these students are discharged to community-based services, educational aftercare planning and the transition process back to receiving schools are important factors in determining future academic and occupational success. Psychiatric and educational profiles of these students (n = 33) admitted to an inpatient psychiatric facility were examined via a case review. Perspectives on the transition planning process were examined through interviews with key inpatient staff and staff at receiving schools. Overall, this sample of Bipolar youth was characterized by difficulties with cognitive abilities post-illness onset, concerns about social-emotional and stigma issues in returning to community school, and erratic patterns of hospitalization and school attendance. Despite the ongoing struggles with mental status, most subjects were able to return to community schooling due to collaborative planning strategies of inpatient and receiving school staff. The most significant barriers to successful transition was lack of student/parental consent to share illness and assessment information with the school, and treatment non-adherence. The findings are significant in that they provide a comprehensive picture of the emotional and cognitive challenges this relatively rare group of students face in attending community school.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".