MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2885584976 · doi:10.1097/jcp.0000000000000931

Can We Improve Physical Health Monitoring for Patients Taking Antipsychotics on a Mental Health Inpatient Unit?

2018· article· en· W2885584976 on OpenAlexaff
Elyse Ross, Rebecca Barnett, Rebecca Tudhope, Kamini Vasudev

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Psychopharmacology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
FundersHealth Research Board
KeywordsMedicineMedical recordBlood pressureDiabetes mellitusEmergency medicineAuditPhysical therapyPediatricsInternal medicineEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Patients with severe mental illness are at risk of medical complications, including cardiovascular disease, metabolic syndrome, and diabetes. Given this vulnerability, combined with metabolic risks of antipsychotics, physical health monitoring is critical. Inpatient admission is an opportunity to screen for medical comorbidities. Our objective was to improve the rates of physical health monitoring on an inpatient psychiatry unit through implementation of an electronic standardized order set. METHODS: Using a clinical audit tool, we completed a baseline retrospective audit (96 eligible charts) of patients aged 18 to 100 years, discharged between January and March 2012, prescribed an antipsychotic for 3 or more days. We then developed and implemented a standard electronic admission order set and provided training to inpatient clinical staff. We completed a second chart audit of patients discharged between January and March 2016 (190 eligible charts) to measure improvement in physical health monitoring and intervention rates for abnormal results. RESULTS: In the 2012 audit, thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH), blood pressure, blood glucose, fasting lipids, electrocardiogram (ECG), and height/weight were measured in 71%, 92%, 31%, 36%, 51%, and 75% of patients, respectively. In the 2016 audit, TSH, blood pressure, blood glucose, fasting lipids, ECG, and height/weight were measured in 86%, 96%, 96%, 64%, 87%, and 71% of patients, respectively. There were statistically significant improvements (P < 0.05) in monitoring rates for blood glucose, lipids, ECG, and TSH. Intervention rates for abnormal blood glucose and/or lipids (feedback to family doctor and/or patient, consultation to hospitalist, endocrinology, and/or dietician) did not change between 2012 and 2016. CONCLUSIONS: Electronic standardized order set can be used as a tool to improve screening for physical health comorbidity in patients with severe mental illness receiving antipsychotic medications.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.092
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.092
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.542
Teacher spread0.418 · 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

Citations15
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical PsychopharmacologySame topicSchizophrenia research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207