MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4362689217 · doi:10.3138/cjpe.16.002

Methodological Challenges in Evaluating Mobile Crisis Psychiatric Programs

2001· article· en· W4362689217 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Lorraine E. Ferris, Kenneth L. Shulman, Jack I. Williams

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Program Evaluation · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychiatric care and mental health services
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionPsychologyPoliticsService delivery frameworkService (business)PsychiatryPublic relationsPolitical scienceBusinessMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: Mobile crisis psychiatric programs (MCPPs) are innovative community interventions that have gained acceptance in the health, social, and political environments. In Canada they are becoming widely implemented, and the need to evaluate them is pressing. Unfortunately, there has been very little formal evaluation of them and virtually no data on their effectiveness. Part of the reason for this deficiency may be the methodological challenges inherent in these programs. In this article, we discuss these difficulties by examining the integration of these programs within the service delivery network and offer suggestions for future evaluative research.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.974
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.599
GPT teacher head0.554
Teacher spread0.045 · 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.

Study designOther design
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

Citations4
Published2001
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Program EvaluationSame topicPsychiatric care and mental health servicesFrench-language works237,207