Proactive and integrated consultation-liaison psychiatry for older medical inpatients: A mixed methods description of training, care provided and clinician experience in the HOME study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To describe the practical experience of delivering a proactive and integrated consultation-liaison (C-L) psychiatry service model (PICLP). PICLP is designed for older medical inpatients and is explicitly biopsychosocial and discharge-focused. In this paper we report: (a) observations on the training of 15 clinicians (seven senior C-L psychiatrists and eight assisting clinicians) to deliver PICLP; (b) the care they provided to 1359 patients; (c) their experiences of working in this new way. METHOD: A mixed methods observational study using quantitative and qualitative data, collected prospectively over two years as part of The HOME Study (a randomized trial comparing PICLP with usual care). RESULTS: The clinicians were successfully trained to deliver PICLP according to the service manual. They proactively assessed all patients and found that most had multiple biopsychosocial problems impeding their timely discharge from hospital. They integrated with ward teams to provide a range of interventions aimed at addressing these problems. Delivering PICLP took a modest amount of clinical time, and the clinicians experienced it as both clinically valuable and professionally rewarding. CONCLUSION: The experience of delivering PICLP highlights the special role that C-L psychiatry clinicians, working in a proactive and integrated way, can play in medical care.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".