MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309618997 · doi:10.1145/3555605

Uncovering Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) from Clinical Narratives within the Electronic Health Record

2022· article· en· W4309618997 on OpenAlexaff
Fayika Farhat Nova, Rachel Pfafman, Kelley Kardys, Connie Kerrigan, Shion Guha, Jessica Pater

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild Abuse and Trauma
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthAdverse Childhood ExperiencesPsychiatryAnxietyThematic analysisSexual abuseNarrativeMedicineHealth carePsychologyClinical psychologyPoison controlQualitative researchSuicide preventionMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Adverse Childhood Events (ACEs) are potentially traumatic events that occur in childhood (e.g., sexual abuse and maternal violence). Clinical research highlights the significant impact ACEs have on youth's mental health similar to other youth-related issues like traditional bullying and cyberbullying. However, research focused on the intersection of these two are limited. We report the results from a qualitative study that used electronic health record (EHR) data and clinical narratives from Parkview Behavioral Health hospital (n=719) to better understand the presentation of ACEs in patients who indicated cyber/bullying contributed to their inpatient hospital admission. Our deductive thematic analyses on the clinical narratives/notes and diagnoses highlight the connection of ACEs with cyber/bullying and other clinical diagnoses like depression, anxiety, PTSD, and ADD/ADHD. Additionally, our results point to potential impacts of the gender spectrum and other non-ACE indicators like adoption and the need for Department of Child Services (DCS). The outcome of this study provides distinct computational and clinical design guidelines for better collaborative decision making in healthcare, including the need for ACEs screening as standard-of-care within acute mental health settings. CAUTION: This paper includes graphic contents about adverse childhood traumas and events.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.326
Threshold uncertainty score0.814

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer InteractionSame topicChild Abuse and TraumaFrench-language works237,207