MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2964668614 · doi:10.1176/appi.ps.201900112

Effect of a Psychiatric Emergency Department Expansion on Acute Mental Health and Addiction Service Use Trends in a Large Urban Center

2019· article· en· W2964668614 on OpenAlexaffabout
Nadine Reid, Saulo Castel, Scott Veldhuizen, Adair Roberts, Vicky Stergiopoulos

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychiatric Services · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEmergency and Acute Care Studies
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAddictionMental healthPsychiatryCenter (category theory)Emergency departmentService (business)Mental health servicePsychologyMedicineMedical emergencyBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: This study examined recent growth in demand for acute mental health and addiction (MHA) care in a large urban center and changes in patient flow following the expansion of a psychiatric emergency department (ED). METHODS: A retrospective observational design used administrative data in adjusted negative binomial regression models to identify time trends at seven hospitals over a 6-year period in central Toronto. Two-part linear spline models compared trends before and after a psychiatric ED expansion. RESULTS: Per capita MHA-related ED visits grew rapidly across the acute care system over the study period, although admissions per MHA ED visit decreased. Expanding a psychiatric ED did not influence overall system-level growth, but it significantly shifted traffic; the annual MHA ED visit growth rate increased at the expanded ED while decreasing at surrounding hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: Given increasing demand systemwide, individual hospital ED expansions may be inappropriate; planning should consider the whole system.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.155
Threshold uncertainty score0.308

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.287 · 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychiatric ServicesSame topicEmergency and Acute Care StudiesFrench-language works237,207