MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403782423 · doi:10.1177/00048674241289016

Exploring the reliability and profile of frequent mental health presentations using different methods: An observational study using statewide ambulance data over a 4-year period

2024· article· en· W4403782423 on OpenAlexaff
Anthony Hew, Jesse T Young, Bosco Rowland, Debbie Scott, Ziad Nehme, Shalini Arunogiri, Dan I. Lubman

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSuicide and Self-Harm Studies
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersNational Health and Medical Research Council
KeywordsObservational studyReliability (semiconductor)Mental healthMedicinePeriod (music)Medical emergencyEmergency medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: A disproportionate number of mental health presentations to emergency services are made by frequent presenters. No current consensus definition of a frequent presenter exists. Using a statewide population-based ambulance database, this study (i) applied previous statistical methods to determine thresholds for frequent presenters, (ii) explored characteristics of the identified frequent presenter groups compared to non-frequent presenters and (iii) assessed the reliability of these methods in predicting continued frequent presenter status over time. METHODS: Statistical methods utilised in previous studies to identify frequent presenters were applied to all ambulance attendances for mental health symptoms, self-harm and alcohol and other drug issues between 1 January 2017 and 31 December 2020 in Victoria, Australia. Differences in characteristics between identified frequent and non-frequent presenter groups were determined by logistic regression analysis. The consistency of agreement of frequent presenter status over time was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients. RESULTS: Thresholds for frequent presenters ranged from a mean of 5 to 39 attendances per calendar year, with groups differing in size, service use and characteristics. Compared to non-frequent presenters, frequent presenters had greater odds of being female, presenting with self-harm, experiencing social disadvantage or housing issues, involving police co-attendance and being transported to hospital. All frequent presenter definitions had poor reliability in predicting ongoing frequent presentations over time. CONCLUSION: A range of methods can define frequent presenters according to thresholds of yearly service use. Reasons for identifying frequent presenters may influence the method chosen. Future studies should explore definitions that capture the dynamic nature of presentations by this group.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.428
GPT teacher head0.490
Teacher spread0.062 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian & New Zealand Journal of PsychiatrySame topicSuicide and Self-Harm StudiesFrench-language works237,207