A Way through the woods: Development of an integrated care pathway for adolescents with depression
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Depression in adolescents is common and debilitating. Treatment approaches vary widely across clinics and may not reflect evidence-based care. Integrated care pathways (ICPs) are implementation tools to facilitate bridging the gap between rigorous but often complex clinical practice guidelines and what is actually practiced. We describe the development of an ICP for the treatment of Adolescents with Major Depressive Disorder (MDD-A) based on the best-available clinical practice guidelines and derived in collaboration with clinicians, administrators, youth partners and caregivers. METHODS: With clinician and health service manager input, we took the recommendations from a high quality clinical practice guideline (the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence Clinical Practice Guideline for Depression in Children and Young People) and translated them into an ICP. Feedback from youth partners and clinicians was iteratively incorporated into the current version of the pathway using a collaborative approach. RESULTS: The current iteration of the pathway at a Canadian tertiary care teaching hospital is described. All youth (and caregivers, if applicable) are offered a multi-family psychoeducation session, a 16-session Group Cognitive Behaviour Therapy and team reviews every 4 weeks that include measurement-based care. Conditional branches of the pathway include a medication algorithm and an 8-session group for caregivers. CONCLUSIONS: The resulting ICP provides a tool to facilitate bridging the gap between evidence and clinical practice.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it