Effectiveness of a professional development training program in increasing knowledge of mental health clinicians specializing in early psychosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: For early psychosis services to be effective, it is essential to have staff that are trained in evidence-based interventions in this area. In this paper, we report on research undertaken by The Early Psychosis Prevention and Intervention Centre's Statewide Services (ESW) team. The focus was on assessing knowledge acquisition in early psychosis clinicians that had attended ESW's specialist training. METHODS: Between October 2012 and October 2017, data were collected from a large cohort of clinicians that had attended 46 ESW workshops covering topics identified in international guidelines as key components of early psychosis service provision. Participants were asked to complete between 3 and 11 pre- and post-workshop short answer and/or multiple choice questions that related to learning outcomes for the workshop. The percentage of correct responses before and after the workshop was compared for each participant, with a cumulative measure taken to provide information regarding knowledge acquisition across each workshop. RESULTS: Participant compliance was high (89.7%) with 962 completed questionnaires being collected from 1073 attendees across the workshops. Results showed that the ESW training led to a statistically significant increase in clinician knowledge from pre-training scores of 47.2% correct, to 83.5% correct answers at the conclusion of training (pre M = 47.2%, SD = 28.8; post M = 83.5%, SD = 23.7; t[890] = -35.66, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Training that utilized adult learning principles had a strong focus on evidence-based interventions, and used clinical examples to embed core principles, led to a statistically significant increase in early intervention clinician knowledge.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".