MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384301699 · doi:10.1097/pra.0000000000000725

“Psychotherapy in the Pressure Cooker”: A Systematic Review of Single Session Psychosocial Interventions in Emergency Departments for Suicide-related Thoughts or Behaviors

2023· review· en· W4384301699 on OpenAlexaff
Gabrielle Chartier, F.C. Lam, Yvonne Bergmans, Jodi Lofchy, James M. Bolton, E. David Klonsky, Juveria Zaheer, David Kealy

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Psychiatric Practice · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSuicide and Self-Harm Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of TorontoSt Joseph's Health CentreUniversity of British ColumbiaManitoba Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychosocialPsycINFOMedicinePsychological interventionCINAHLEmergency departmentMEDLINESuicidal ideationRandomized controlled trialObservational studySystematic reviewPoison controlSuicide preventionPsychiatryFamily medicineEmergency medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Up to 20% of individuals who die by suicide have visited an emergency department (ED) within 4 weeks of their death. Limited guidance is available regarding the modification of clinical outcomes following a psychosocial intervention in the ED for pediatric and adult populations. METHODS: A systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines was conducted to identify studies focused on single-session psychosocial interventions for pediatric and adult patients experiencing suicide-related thoughts or behaviors (SRTB) in the ED. Two reviewers independently screened articles identified using the key terms suicide/self-harm, emergency department, and interview. Medline, PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and CENTRAL were searched from inception to August 2018. RESULTS: After screening 3234 abstracts, 29 articles were selected for full-text review and 14 articles, representing 8 distinct studies (N=782), were included. A high level of heterogeneity was present in the included articles, with 7 randomized-controlled trials, 2 nonrandomized-controlled trials, 2 cohort studies, 2 observational studies, and 1 feasibility study. Most of the included studies focused on adolescents (6 articles) or military veterans (7 articles). Strong statistical evidence of ED interventions improving outpatient service linkage was supported (χ2: 81.80, P<0.0001, 7 studies). CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study suggested promising outcomes for patients presenting to the ED with SRTB who receive a single-session psychosocial intervention. All of the studies that measured such outcomes found significantly increased follow-up care in the intervention arm. Further research is needed to strengthen the evidence base, provide better patient representation, and improve our understanding of the mechanisms by which the psychosocial intervention for SRTB in the ED ameliorates patient outcomes (CRD42020156496).

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.010
Bibliometrics0.0070.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.143
GPT teacher head0.494
Teacher spread0.351 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations9
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Psychiatric PracticeSame topicSuicide and Self-Harm StudiesFrench-language works237,207