An evaluation of satisfaction with emergency department care in children and adolescents with mental health concerns
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We hypothesized that an association exists between satisfaction with ED mental health care delivery and patient and system characteristics. Primary: To evaluate overall satisfaction with ED mental health care delivery. Secondary: To explore aspects of ED mental health care delivery associated with general satisfaction, and patient and ED visit characteristic associated with total satisfaction scores and reported care experience themes. METHODS: We enrolled patients < 18 years of age presenting with a mental health concern between February 1, 2020 and January 31, 2021, to two pediatric EDs in Alberta, Canada. Satisfaction data were collected using the Service Satisfaction Scale, a measure of global satisfaction with mental health services. Association of general satisfaction with ED mental health care was evaluated using Pearson's correlation coefficient and variables associated with total satisfaction score was assessed using multivariable regression analyses. Inductive thematic analysis of qualitative feedback identified satisfaction and patient experience themes. RESULTS: 646 participants were enrolled. 71.2% were Caucasian and 56.3% female. Median age was 13 years (IQR 11-15). Parents/caregivers (n = 606) and adolescents (n = 40) were most satisfied with confidentiality and respect in the ED and least satisfied with how ED services helped reduce symptoms and/or problems. General satisfaction was associated with perceived amount of help received in the ED (r = 0.85) and total satisfaction with evaluation by a mental health team member (p = 0.004) and psychiatrist consultation (p = 0.05). Comments demonstrated satisfaction with ED provider attitudes and interpersonal skills and dissatisfaction with access to mental health and addictions care, wait time, and the impact of COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: There is a need to improve ED mental health care delivery, with a focus on timely access to ED mental health providers. Access to outpatient/community-based mental health care is needed to complement care received in the ED and to provide continuity of care for youth with mental health concerns.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".