MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2962093635 · doi:10.1177/1744987119845020

Exploring the factors associated with non-urgent emergency department utilisation for mental health care

2019· article· en· W2962093635 on OpenAlexaffabout
Fabrice Mowbray, Abeer Omar, Kathyrn Pfaff, Maher M. El‐Masri

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of research in nursing · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEmergency and Acute Care Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WindsorMcMaster UniversityImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmergency departmentMental healthMedicineReferralMedical emergencyHealth careLogistic regressionEmergency medicineFamily medicineNursingPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Emergency department visits for mental health care are on the rise across North America. Patients with mental illness are at an increased risk for frequent and non-urgent emergency department visitation. AIMS: The purpose of this study was to examine the independent predictors of non-urgent emergency department use for mental health care. METHODS: A secondary data analysis was conducted with archived data provided by the Erie St. Clair Local Health Integration Network in Ontario. RESULTS: A total of 13,114 mental health-related emergency department visits were analysed using logistic regression with generalised estimating equations modelling. The findings suggest the following characteristics are predictive of non-urgent emergency department use for mental health care: age, season, time of day, access to primary health care, mode of arrival, hospital type, referral source and patient diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study can be utilised to assist clinicians and policy makers in identifying and managing patients using the emergency department for non-urgent mental health care.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.135
Threshold uncertainty score0.254

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.206
GPT teacher head0.458
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations13
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of research in nursingSame topicEmergency and Acute Care StudiesFrench-language works237,207