MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409337790 · doi:10.5334/ijic.9498

Developing a quality standard for youth experiencing mental health and/or substance use concerns in emergency department settings

2025· article· en· W4409337790 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Roxanne Turuba, David Barbic, Frank Scheuermeyer, Eddy Lang, Shawn Mondoux, Steve Mathias, Skye Barbic

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Integrated Care · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAdolescent and Pediatric Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmergency departmentMental healthSubstance useSubstance abuseMedical emergencyMedicinePsychologyNursingPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Mental health and substance use disorders affect more than 1 billion people globally and are the leading cause of disability in children and youth (under the age of 25). While mild to moderate mental health and/or substance use (MHSU) concerns are often best addressed in community, youth have increasingly relied on emergency departments (EDs) to address their MHSU needs, contributing to ED overcrowding. For instance, in Canada, there was a 66% rise in ED visits by youth (ages 5-24) presenting with mental health and/or substance use (MHSU) concerns between 2007 and 2017. Due to long wait times in the ED, youth often wait hours, sometimes days, before being seen and often do not receive outpatient care, thus often return to the ED for the same concerns. Despite this trend, no standard of care exists to ensure youth get connected to appropriate community MHSU services after presenting to the ED. Objective: This project aims to develop a pan-Canadian standard describing what high-quality care looks like for youth presenting at the ED with MHSU concerns, including transitions to appropriate MHSU services. This standard will help healthcare practitioners working in EDs and community MHSU services provide consistent, high-quality care to youth experiencing MHSU challenges. Methods: In the first phase of this project (September 2023 – January 2024) a technical committee will create a draft outline of the standard using existing evidence on the way MHSU support is provided in the ED and ten principles of integrated youth services. This includes an initial qualitative study conducted with service providers in British Columbia to understand how MHSU assessment, treatment, and transitions to care currently occur for youth, a broader scoping review summarizing global evidence, and their own experiences and expertise. The technical committee is comprised of youth, caregivers, ED staff, MHSU service providers, integrated youth service (IYS) leaders, and MHSU researchers from across Canada. In the second phase (February 2024 – March 2024) we will conduct a public review of the standard using a Delphi process and stakeholder-specific deliberative dialogues with three groups of experts: youth, service providers, and decision makers. We will lean on the Federation of IYS Networks, which is a pan-Canada network of IYS, to share the draft standard with their networks and ensure representation from diverse populations (e.g., geographically, cultural background). The feedback provided will be used to refine the standard by the technical committee. Results/Implications: The project will articulate a specific and actionable standard to improve timely access to care for youth accessing the ED for MHSU concerns. This will involve the type of care youth should receive, how to assess MHSU severity, transitions to community MHSU, and how to ensure continuity of care. This will also include specific indicators to measure progress in meeting each quality statement and will help inform interventions needed in EDs to meet the standard and ensure timely transitions to community youth MHSU services.

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)0.207
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.248
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.534
Threshold uncertainty score0.978

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2070.248
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.005
Bibliometrics0.0110.009
Science and technology studies0.0080.004
Scholarly communication0.0110.006
Open science0.0100.010
Research integrity0.0030.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.140
GPT teacher head0.500
Teacher spread0.360 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Integrated CareSame topicAdolescent and Pediatric HealthcareFrench-language works237,207