MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3147179145 · doi:10.11124/jbies-20-00307

Interventions to change clinicians’ behavior in relation to suicide prevention care in the emergency department: a scoping review protocol

2021· review· en· W3147179145 on OpenAlexaff
Hwayeon Danielle Shin, Christine Cassidy, Lori E. Weeks, Leslie Anne Campbell, Melissa Rothfus, Janet Curran

Bibliographic record

VenueJBI Evidence Synthesis · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSuicide and Self-Harm Studies
Canadian institutionsKellogg's (Canada)Capital District Health AuthorityDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCINAHLPsycINFOPsychological interventionEmergency departmentScopusMedicineBehavior changeIntervention (counseling)MEDLINENursingPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: This review aims to explore, characterize, and map the literature on interventions implemented to change emergency department clinicians' behavior related to suicide prevention using the Behavior Change Wheel as a guiding theoretical framework. INTRODUCTION: An emergency department is a critical place for suicide prevention, yet many patients who present with suicide-related thoughts and behaviors are discharged without proper assessment or appropriate treatment. Supporting clinicians (who provide direct clinical care, including nurses, physicians, and allied health professionals) to make the desired behavior change following evidence-based suicide prevention care is an essential step toward improving patient outcomes. However, reviews to date have yet to take a theoretical approach to investigate interventions implemented to change clinicians' behavior. INCLUSION CRITERIA: This review will consider literature that includes interventions that target emergency department clinicians' behavior related to suicide prevention. Behavior change refers to observable practice changes as well as proxy measures of behavior change, including knowledge and attitudes. There are many ways in which an intervention can change clinicians' behavior (eg, education, altering service delivery). This review will include a wide range of interventions that target behavior change regardless of the type, but will exclude interventions that exclusively target patients. METHODS: Multiple databases will be searched: PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Embase. We will also include gray literature, including Google search, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global, and Scopus conference papers. Full texts of included studies will be reviewed, critically appraised, and extracted. Extracted data will be coded to identify intervention functions using the Behavior Change Wheel. Findings will be summarized in tables accompanied by narrative reports.

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)0.075
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.069
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score0.396

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0750.069
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.015
Bibliometrics0.0230.021
Science and technology studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0080.008
Open science0.0060.007
Research integrity0.0070.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0420.008

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 head0.231
GPT teacher head0.533
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJBI Evidence Synthesis→Same topicSuicide and Self-Harm Studies→French-language works237,207→