Outcomes Following a Mental Health Care Intervention for Children in the Emergency Department
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Importance: The emergency department (ED) is an important safety net for children experiencing mental and behavioral health crises and can serve as a navigational hub for families seeking support for these concerns. Objectives: To evaluate the outcomes of a novel mental health care bundle on child well-being, satisfaction with care, and health system metrics. Design, Setting, and Participants: Nonrandomized trial of 2 pediatric EDs in Alberta, Canada. Children younger than 18 years with mental and behavioral health presentations were enrolled before implementation (preimplementation: January 2020 to January 2021), at implementation onset (run-in: February 2021 to June 2021), and during bundle delivery (implementation: July 2021 to June 2022). Intervention: The bundle involved risk stratification, standardized mental health assessments, and provision of an urgent follow-up appointment after the visit, if required. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome, child well-being 30 days after the ED visit, was assessed using the Stirling Children's Wellbeing Scale (children aged <14 years) or Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale (children aged 14-17 years). Change in well-being between the preimplementation and implementation periods was examined using interrupted time-series analysis and multivariable modeling. Changes in health system metrics (hospitalization, ED length of stay [LOS], and revisits) and care satisfaction were also examined. Results: A total of 1412 patients (median [IQR] age, 13 [11-15] years), with 715 enrolled preimplementation (390 [54.5%] female; 55 [7.7%] First Nations, Inuit, or Métis; 46 [6.4%] South, Southcentral, or Southeast Asian; and 501 [70.1%] White) and 697 enrolled at implementation (357 [51.2%] female; 51 [7.3%] First Nations, Inuit, or Métis; 39 [5.6%] South, Southcentral, or Southeast Asian; and 511 [73.3%] White) were included in the analysis. There were no differences between study periods in well-being. Reduced well-being z scores were associated with mood disorder diagnosis (standardized mean difference, -0.14; 95% CI, -0.26 to -0.02) and nonbinary gender identity (standardized mean difference, -0.41; 95% CI, -0.62 to -0.19). The implementation period involved fewer hospitalizations (difference in hospitalizations, -6.9; 95% CI, -10.4 to -3.4) and longer ED LOS (1.1 hours; 95% CI, 0.7 to 1.4 hours). There were no differences between study periods in ED revisits or care satisfaction. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, the delivery of a care bundle was not associated with higher child well-being 30 days after an ED visit. Hospitalizations did decrease during bundle delivery, but ED LOS did not. These health system findings may have been affected by broader changes in patient volumes and flow processes that occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic, which took place as the study was conducted. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04292379.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".