Satisfaction, independent living skills and perceived change of patients undergoing community psychiatric treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To estimate quality parameters in the treatments offered, these criteria be evaluated in a continuous and integrated manner, considering patients' and family members' perspectives as well as that of professionals. Literature has highlighted the need to evaluate the results of treatment in psychosocial care facilities from the user point of view. From a quantitative perspective, some studies seek to identify a “degree” of social reinsertion, presenting some variables. Thus, the present study evaluated parameters considered as possible indicators of good results in the psychosocial rehabilitation process, constituting a tool for the planning of managers and mental health professionals. This is a observational study performed between January 2015 and August 2016 in Brazil. The study included 84 patients invited to a verbal interview. The sample consisted of 84 patients treated by Psychosocial Care Facility. The results obtained reveal the achievement of a satisfactory mean regarding the service, about which 85% of the users declare themselves satisfied. However, we found that patients need significant support to perform simple tasks. Independent living skills and perceived change have a lower score when related to satisfaction with the services provided, suggesting, then, that rehabilitation needs to focus on the acquisition of independent living skills, so that the patient can seek a life as close to normal as possible.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".