MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3134172654 · doi:10.1111/jpm.12752

Silver linings: Observed reductions in aggression and use of restraints and seclusion in psychiatric inpatient care during COVID‐19

2021· article· en· W3134172654 on OpenAlexaff
Krystle Martin, Simone Arbour, Carolyn McGregor, Mark J. Rice

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHealthcare Decision-Making and Restraints
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech UniversityOntario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSeclusionAggressionPandemicMental healthPsychiatryPsychological interventionMental illnessHealth careSuicide preventionPsychologyMedicineOccupational safety and healthCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Poison controlNursingMedical emergencyDiseasePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

WHAT IS KNOWN ABOUT THE SUBJECT?: In a survey conducted by the World Health Organization (WHO) in the summer of 2020, 93% of countries worldwide acknowledged negative impacts on their mental health services. Previous research during the H1N1 pandemic in 2009 established an increase of patient aggression in psychiatric facilities. WHAT THE PAPER ADDS TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE?: Despite expected worsening of mental health, our hospital observed reductions in aggressive behaviour among inpatients and subsequent use of coercive interventions by staff in the months following Covid-19 pandemic restrictions being implemented. The downward trend in incidents observed during the pandemic has suggested that aggression in mental health hospitals may be more situation-specific and less so a factor of mental illness. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE?: We believe that the reduction in aggressive behaviour observed during the pandemic is related to changes in our organization that occurred in response to concerns about patient well-being; our co-design approach shifted trust, choice and power. Therefore, practices that support these constructs are needed to maintain the outcomes we experienced. Rather than return to normal in the wake of the pandemic, we are strongly encouraged to sustain the changes we made and continue to find better ways to support and work with the individuals who rely on or use our services. ABSTRACT: The global COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically changed the operation of health care such that many services were put on hold as patients were triaged differently, people delayed seeking care, and transition to virtual care was enacted, including in psychiatric facilities. Most of the media dialogue has been negative; however, there have been some silver linings observed. Coinciding with the pandemic has been a reduction in aggressive incidents at our psychiatric hospital, along with the decreased need to use restraints and seclusion to manage behaviour. In this paper, we are taking stock of the changes that have occurred in response to the pandemic in an attempt to share our learnings and offer suggestions so that health care does not necessarily return to "normal".

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.348 · 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

Citations19
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Psychiatric and Mental Health NursingSame topicHealthcare Decision-Making and RestraintsFrench-language works237,207