Tracking Needs-Based Community and Specialized Services of Young Adults and Their Parents Before and During a First Episode of Psychosis (FEP): Highlighting Intervention Trajectories in FEP
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: This article aims to document 10 service trajectories of young adults (YA) and their parents, informed by healthcare professionals (HP), before and during a first episode of psychosis (FEP). Design: Based on a crisis model perspective of the Life Course Theory (Elder; Elder and Shanahan) developed by Carpentier and White, and adapted to the current context to track community and specialized services trajectories. Thematic analysis was used to code responses to open-ended questions around the need for help and accessing services by young adults affected by a psychotic disorder, and their parents. Setting: In collaboration with FEP clinics, setting of choice by YA and their parents. Participants: 5 YA, 12 parents, and 6 HP. Results: 10 individual service trajectories grouped into 3 distinct types of trajectories (optimal, typical, and complex) based on grouping 5 similar characteristics, highlighting service access complexity and early intervention in FEP. Conclusion: This study is the first of its kind to examine the experiences of those who seek needs-based community and specialized services leading up to and during a FEP. Findings provide key insights related to early intervention in FEP and recommendations on improving access to such services in Quebec.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".