A fidelity assessment of Early Psychosis Intervention Services in British Columbia, Canada.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Established standards and guidelines for early psychosis intervention (EPI) in British Columbia (BC) and across Canada define the intent and scope of individual EPI programs. EPI programs are a critical mental health service both in BC and internationally, providing a range of pharmacological, psychological, and social supports under one service. If EPI principles and practices are applied, positive outcomes are expected, including greater reduction of psychotic symptoms compared to standard treatment, improved treatment adherence, fewer recurrent episodes of psychosis, and greater client satisfaction. Low fidelity, or difficulty adhering to the principles associated with the EPI model, may jeopardize attaining these positive outcomes. METHODS: Evaluation of program fidelity to established EPI practice standards and guidelines was conducted at 16 mental health service sites in BC that provide care to young adults with early psychosis. Fidelity assessment was performed via utilization of the EPI Fidelity Scale (EPI-FS). RESULTS: Based on the EPI-FS, two sites (12.5%) met criteria for high fidelity, nine (56.3%) attained moderate fidelity, three (18.8%) attained low fidelity, and two (12.5%) attained very low fidelity. Specialized EPI programs were linked to higher fidelity, while many generic mental health and substance use centres had difficulty following the EPI model. Identified weaknesses included provision of psychological therapy, family education, ongoing program evaluation, and supervision and mentorship for clinicians. Sites with sufficient resources and staff development opportunities had higher overall fidelity. CONCLUSION: These findings underscore the importance of equitable resource allocation and the need for specialized EPI services, especially in underserved areas in BC.
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 | 0.008 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".