Prepared for transition? A cross‐sectional descriptive study of the gains attained in early psychosis programs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To examine the degree to which youth identified as ready for discharge from three Canadian early psychosis intervention (EPI) programs had achieved optimal outcomes (ie, symptom remission, quality of life, self-esteem and functioning). METHODS: This cross-sectional descriptive study is part of a larger study assessing the effectiveness of an evidence-based intervention to sustain the gains acquired in EPI programs in two Canadian provinces (Ontario and Nova Scotia), as youth transition from EPI services to community-based care. Baseline data collected from 39 participants receiving usual treatment in these three EPI programs comprised the comparison group. Participants completed measures to assess symptoms, quality of life, self-esteem and functional level just prior to discharge. RESULTS: Participants demonstrated lower levels of symptoms, greater quality of life, greater self-esteem and greater levels of functioning, following EPI treatment when compared to similar youth described in the literature. These findings suggest that study participants had achieved optimal outcomes following EPI treatment. CONCLUSION: The study findings have laid the ground work for the current Canadian Institutes of Health Research partnership study in which our research group is assessing the effectiveness of an evidence-based transitional intervention in order to address critical psychosocial issues of identity, stigma, effective relationships and meaningful life goals, along with the development of an individualized 'passport for transition'. It is anticipated that implementing an evidence-based transitional intervention will support participants to maintain the gains made in EPI programs once they transition to community-based care and will inform future research addressing this challenging issue.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".