Treatment outcome indicators of schizophrenia according to Brazilian family caregivers and outpatients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and objective: The need to measure treatment outcomes in mental health services from the perspective of users and family members has been highlighted in the literature as a fundamental aspect to improve the care provided. The objective of this study was to measure the treatment outcome provided by a Brazilian Psychosocial Care Center from the perspective of outpatients and their family members.Methods: A correlational study was performed with 84 outpatients and 40 family members, between 2015 and 2016, interviewing them using the Satisfaction (SATIS-BR), Perception of Change (PCS), Independent Living Skills (ILSS) and Family Burden (FBIS-BR) scales.Results: There was a high index of satisfaction with the mental health service, with a mean of 4.23 for the users interviewed and 4.36 for the family members. The perception of change presented a mean of 2.58 for the patients and 2.19 for the family members. The independent living ability presented a mean of 2.52.Conclusions: The high indices of satisfaction suggest successes, as well as points to be improved in the mental health policy implemented in the municipality. However, reintegration into the labor market was presented as an aspect with a need for investments through health and labor policies, since it was related to the subjective burden.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".