MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2808887506 · doi:10.5430/jnep.v8n11p24

Capturing acute stress disorder in the trauma population

2018· article· en· W2808887506 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Janelle Marie Delle, Joan E. King

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nursing Education and Practice · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPosttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInternational Society for Traumatic Stress Studies
KeywordsAcute Stress DisorderPsychiatryAnxietyPopulationMedicineReferralClinical psychologyPsychologyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Acute Stress Disorder (ASD) is classified as a psychiatric diagnosis that was first introduced to the DSM-IV in 1994. It was introduced to describe acute stress reactions that precede Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). ASD usually occurs within the first month after the occurrence of a traumatic event. Early recognition of ASD is crucial from both an early treatment standpoint and avoidance of progressing to PTSD, especially in the trauma population, as late recognition can lead to long-term mental and physical suffering. At this time, there is no protocol for screening of ASD upon admission to a Level I trauma center in the Southeast in the Unites States. Hence, not all trauma patients are assessed for ASD. Often, acute stress is recognized several days after admission, with late referrals to the psychiatric team for psychological evaluation and treatment. This late psychiatric referral often leads to the patient’s inability to participate in physical rehabilitation due to stress and anxiety, thus increasing hospital stay and use of resources. Thus, collaborating between the primary medical team and psychiatry team is essential and facilitates the recovery process for potential acute or long-term psychiatric disorders. To determine if ASD was recognized in the trauma population at a large Level I Trauma Center in the Southeast, and if referrals to psychiatry were initiated in a timely manner, this quality improvement study was developed. The data from this study served to correlate the percentage of patients who screened positive for ASD on admission to a sub-acute trauma floor. A standardized tool called The Stanford Acute Stress Reaction Questionnaire (SASRQ) was used to determine the frequency of ASD in this trauma population. We also ascertained if the trauma nurse practitioners (NPs) had requested a psychiatric referral without the use of the SASRQ tool. Findings included 18 of the 50 trauma patients who had screened positive for ASD (36%). It was found that of those 18 patients who screened positive for ASD, 2 patients received a psychiatric consultation for evaluation and treatment. These findings suggest a needed focus of capturing ASD early in the admission process, using a validated screening tool, along with early psychological intervention to aid in prevention of PTSD post-discharge.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.157
GPT teacher head0.525
Teacher spread0.368 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nursing Education and PracticeSame topicPosttraumatic Stress Disorder ResearchFrench-language works237,207