MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3028902106 · doi:10.1192/bjo.2020.39

Typology of patients who use emergency departments for mental and substance use disorders

2020· article· en· W3028902106 on OpenAlexaffabout
Marie‐Josée Fleury, Guy Grenier, Jean-Marie Bamvita, Francine Ferland

Bibliographic record

VenueBJPsych Open · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in RehabilitationDouglas Mental Health University Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmergency departmentMental healthPsychological interventionMedicineTypologyPsychiatryDisadvantagedFamily medicineMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Identifying profiles of people with mental and substance use disorders who use emergency departments may help guide the development of interventions more appropriate to their particular characteristics and needs. AIMS: To develop a typology for the frequency of visits to the emergency department for mental health reasons based on the Andersen model. METHOD: Questionnaires were completed by patients who attended an emergency department (n = 320), recruited in Quebec (Canada), and administrative data were obtained related to sociodemographic/socioeconomic characteristics, mental health diagnoses including alcohol and drug use, and emergency department and mental health service utilization. A cluster analysis was performed, identifying needs, predisposing and enabling factors that differentiated subclasses of participants according to frequency of emergency department visits for mental health reasons. RESULTS: Four classes were identified. Class 1 comprised individuals with moderate emergency department use and low use of other health services; mostly young, economically disadvantaged males with substance use disorders. Class 2 comprised individuals with high emergency department and specialized health service use, with multiple mental and substance use disorders. Class 3 comprised middle-aged, economically advantaged females with common mental disorders, who made moderate use of emergency departments but consulted general practitioners. Class 4 comprised older individuals with multiple chronic physical illnesses co-occurring with mental disorders, who made moderate use of the emergency department, but mainly consulted general practitioners. CONCLUSIONS: The study found heterogeneity in emergency department use for mental health reasons, as each of the four classes represented distinct needs, predisposing and enabling factors. As such, interventions should be tailored to different classes of patients who use emergency departments, based on their characteristics.

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)0.006
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations15
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBJPsych OpenSame topicSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207