MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2985655347

Integrating Smartphone Technology at the Time of Discharge from a Child and Adolescent Inpatient Psychiatry Unit.

2017· article· en· W2985655347 on OpenAlexaff
Jonathan M. Gregory, Javeed Sukhera, Melissa Taylor-Gates

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionUnit (ring theory)Mental healthSmartphone applicationSmartphone appChild and adolescent psychiatryDownloadMedicinePsychiatryMedical emergencyPsychologyInternet privacyComputer scienceMultimedia
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: As smartphone technology becomes an increasingly important part of youth mental health, there has been little to no examination of how to effectively integrate smartphone-based safety planning with inpatient care. Our study sought to examine whether or not we could effectively integrate smartphone-based safety planning into the discharge process on a child and adolescent inpatient psychiatry unit. METHOD: ) at the time of discharge. RESULTS: app prior to discharge, with most (68%) suggesting they would download the app after discharge. Notably, all patients who downloaded the app prior to discharge were on their first admission to a psychiatric inpatient unit. CONCLUSION: Child and adolescent psychiatric inpatients have a clear interest in smartphone-based safety planning. Our results suggest that integrating smartphone-related interventions earlier in an admission might improve access before discharge. This highlights the tension between restricting and incorporating smartphone access for child and adolescent inpatients and may inform future study in this area.

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)0.009
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations18
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicDigital Mental Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207