MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3154042130 · doi:10.29328/journal.apmh.1001030

Suicide, the main cause of referral of patients from a general hospital for psychiatric evaluation

2021· article· en· W3154042130 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gómez Elena, Guzmán Marianela

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Psychiatry and Mental Health · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSuicide and Self-Harm Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineReferralTest (biology)General hospitalQuarter (Canadian coin)Medical emergencyPsychiatryEmergency medicineFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Psychiatric emergencies constitute between 1% - 10% of general emergencies in Spain, of which a quarter will end up being hospital admissions. There is little literature on patients who are referred from general to specialized hospitals. Methods: Cross-Sectional study of all the patients referred in 2018. Sociodemographic variables and clinical variables, such as diagnosis and discharge destination, were analyzed. An analysis was performed by comparing means with the Chi Square test. Results: 433 derived emergencies were analyzed. Most of the patients were women. The main reason for derivation were suicide attempts. Of those patients, 40% required hospitalizations. More than 50% of the derived emergencies were referred to the home and followed up on an outpatient basis. Conclusion: Most derived emergencies are referred to the home after evaluation. This implies that most are not life-threatening and that with adequate tools for evaluating suicide risk, we could avoid transfers and improve the resolution of these cases.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.324 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of Psychiatry and Mental HealthSame topicSuicide and Self-Harm StudiesFrench-language works237,207