MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4287881301 · doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2022.105483

Enhancing nurses' capacity to provide concurrent mental health and substance use disorder care: A quasi-experimental intervention study

2022· article· en· W4287881301 on OpenAlexaffabout
Emily Jenkins, Leanne M. Currie, Saima Hirani, Emma Garrod, Trevor Goodyear, Liza McGuinness, Anita David, Kofi Bonnie

Bibliographic record

VenueNurse Education Today · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Treatment and Access
Canadian institutionsBritish Columbia Centre on Substance UseProvidence Health CareUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Institute on Drug Abuse
KeywordsMental healthIntervention (counseling)MedicineChecklistPracticumNursingObservational studyDescriptive statisticsHealth careFamily medicinePsychiatryPsychologyMedical education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Patients experiencing concurrent disorders (i.e., co-occurring mental health and substance use disorders) are prevalent in mental health settings and their health and social outcomes are often poor. This reflects persistent stigma as well as inadequate preparatory training or continuing education for healthcare professionals, including nurses. OBJECTIVE: To explore the impacts of the 1-day 'Enhancing Concurrent Disorder Care Intervention' on nurses' and student nurses' capacity to deliver care, grounded in current evidence, to patients with concurrent disorders in inpatient mental health settings. DESIGN: -test components, guided by the STROBE checklist for observational studies. SETTINGS: Five acute mental health units across two hospitals in British Columbia, Canada, as well as two schools of nursing representing students completing clinical practicum rotations within these settings. PARTICIPANTS: Seventy-six nurses (Registered Nurses and Registered Psychiatric Nurses) and student nurses practicing in inpatient mental health care. METHODS: This educational intervention was informed by a pilot study, which included content validation from international concurrent disorder experts, and further refined through collaborative processes with lived experience and nurse partners. Intervention impacts were examined using online surveys conducted prior to the intervention and within two weeks post-intervention. Surveys assessed knowledge and attitudes about concurrent disorders using a validated instrument and questions developed by the study team. Descriptive statistics alongside paired and independent t-tests and two-way ANOVAs were used to compare survey scores before and after the intervention. RESULTS: Findings indicate that the intervention was effective in improving participants' knowledge and attitudes toward patients with concurrent disorders across participant groups. CONCLUSIONS: Enhancing care and outcomes for patients with concurrent disorders is a global priority. Brief educational interventions aimed at nurses can provide an effective, low-barrier mechanism to address knowledge gaps that contribute to harmful care and adverse outcomes.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: Non-randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.375 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNurse Education TodaySame topicMental Health Treatment and AccessFrench-language works237,207