Characterizing inpatient care for adults with schizophrenia using the Health Quality Ontario indices: A single-centre retrospective cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This single-center retrospective cohort study is one of the first reports to evaluate the inpatient care provided to persons diagnosed with schizophrenia in Canada. METHODS: This study examined all admissions for adults diagnosed with schizophrenia over a 6-month period in 2017 to an inpatient psychiatric unit situated in a nonprofit general hospital in Kingston, Ontario, Canada. The Health Quality Ontario standards for the inpatient care of adults with schizophrenia were used to assess the quality of care provided in hospital. Standards were determined to have been met by doing a thorough chart review for each patient, reviewing all documentation in progress notes, admission notes, discharge notes and emergency room notes for quality standard completion. RESULTS: The average length of stay per patient was 18.64 days. The treatment at this facility largely focused on medication management of schizophrenia; however, it was found that several areas of care did not meet the standard of care as set by the Health Quality Ontario Quality Standards for Schizophrenia Care for Adults in Hospitals, which was set in 2016. Problematic areas were promoting physical activity and healthy eating (4.9% compliance), treatment with clozapine (13.1% compliance) and cognitive behavioural therapy (9.8% compliance). The study site is fully accredited and attending physicians were all psychiatrists. How pervasive these deficiencies are in other settings is not known.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".