MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2805001220 · doi:10.1093/pch/pxy054.012

COPE-COMMUNITY OUTREACH OF PAEDIATRICS AND PSYCHIATRY IN EDUCATION. A 16 YEAR REVIEW: 2001–2017

2018· article· en· W2805001220 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Janice Heard

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicChild and Adolescent Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReferralConfidentialityMental healthOutreachMedical diagnosisPopulationLikert scaleMedicineFamily medicineSocializationPsychologyPsychiatryMedical educationDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

COPE is a collaboration between health and education in a large urban centre. The program enables vulnerable children with undiagnosed developmental, behavioural, mental health and/or medical problems which impact their learning and socialization, to be seen by a paediatrician or child psychiatrist at their school, with first hand input from the school and family. To introduce and describe COPE to paediatricians in Canada. To review 16 years of the program by identifying gender characteristics of the population served, major diagnoses resulting from the consultaitons, describe the referral process, and to present an evaluation of the program obtained through surveying the schools and families for their perception of efficacy, usefulness and confidentiality of the process. This is a review of 3105 children and adolescents served through COPE from 2001–2017. Data has been collected for 16 years and has been analyzed to calculate gender ratios, percentage of consults that required follow up appointments, and percentage of files reactivated for ongoing or new difficulties. ICD 10 codes were collated for the children who had specific diagnoses and were analyzed to determine category of medical, behavioural, developmental and mental health issues being addressed. Likert scale (1–4) surveys sent to school personel and parents were analyzed. The program initially saw only elementary children, but has expanded to include all ages. 80 % of students were male, 20 % female, and 0.45% transgendered. There was an average of 2.3 contacts per child. 39% were initial consultations, 61% reviews/follow-ups. 21% of files were reactivated to address new or ongoing concerns. The most common ICD10 code was Hyperkinetic disorders =71%. Anxiety disorders =13%, Developmental disorders of scholastic skills =12 %, conduct disorders-(the majority are ODD)=10%, specific developmental disorders of speech and language =9%, pervasive developmental disorders =7%, problems related to upbringing, negative life events and family circumstances =7%, and reactions to severe stress and adjustment disorders =5%, (1265 /3104 had ICD10 diagnoses) Many children had multiple diagnoses. ICD coding for all medical and psychiatric diagnoses, and problems related to the family and social circumstances was not done consistently in the early years of the program. The profile of the students served in the past 5 years is fairly constant, and the social complexity of each individual case is increasing. Family and school satisfaction surveys were tracked for 7 years. They consistently report being very satisfied with scores falling between 3.2 and 3.9 on a four point Likert scale. COPE is a highly successful diagnosis and intervention model, impacting a large number of children identified as priorities by their schools.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0100.013
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.357 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child Health→Same topicChild and Adolescent Health→French-language works237,207→