Establishment of a Public Mental Health Database for Research Purposes in the Ferrara Province: Development and Preliminary Evaluation Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The immediate use of data exported from electronic health records (EHRs) for research is often limited by the necessity to transform data elements into an actual data set. Objective: This paper describes the methodology for establishing a data set that originated from an EHR registry that included clinical, health service, and sociodemographic information. Methods: The Extract, Transform, Load process was applied to raw data collected at the Integrated Department of Mental Health and Pathological Addictions in Ferrara, Italy, from 1925 to February 18, 2021, to build the new, anonymized Ferrara-Psychiatry (FEPSY) database. Information collected before the first EHR was implemented (ie, in 1991) was excluded. An unsupervised cluster analysis was performed to identify patient subgroups to support the proof of concept. Results: The FEPSY database included 3,861,432 records on 46,222 patients. Since 1991, each year, a median of 1404 (IQR 1117.5-1757.7) patients had newly accessed care, and a median of 7300 (IQR 6109.5-9397.5) patients were actively receiving care. Among 38,022 patients with a mental disorder, 2 clusters were identified; the first predominantly included male patients who were aged 25 to 34 years at first presentation and were living with their parents, and the second predominantly included female patients who were aged 35 to 44 years and were living with their own families. Conclusions: The process for building the FEPSY database proved to be robust and replicable with similar health care data, even when they were not originally conceived for research purposes. The FEPSY database will enable future in-depth analyses regarding the epidemiology and social determinants of mental disorders, access to mental health care, and resource utilization.
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 | 0.030 | 0.048 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".