Nursing interventions for adults following a mental health crisis: A systematic review guided by trauma‐informed principles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There exists a growing need for health and service providers to respond to persons in a manner that recognizes the prevalence and impact of trauma in individuals and prevent inadvertent re-traumatization in the routine process of care. The experience of mental health crisis in of itself can have traumatic and impactful effects on individuals. Trauma-informed approaches to care offer a framework to provide crisis intervention responses that are based on the acknowledgement of the prevalence and impact of trauma and define trauma not by the event per se, but by the impact of an experience of trauma. The integration of trauma-informed principles in the context of crisis intervention is a current practice gap. In order to inform a portion of a best-practice guideline for registered nurses and the interprofessional team, a systematic literature review was conducted to primarily identify nursing interventions within four weeks of a mental health crisis, with a secondary focus on identifying particular interventions that included trauma-informed principles. The systematic review yielded 21 quantitative and qualitative studies related to nursing interventions for mental health crisis, 10 of which referred to one or more principles of trauma-informed approaches. There was a lack of studies on nursing interventions explicitly linked to implementation of trauma-informed principles, highlighting future research needs and focused efforts to integrate trauma-informed principles into crisis intervention practices.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".