Enhancing referrals to Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services: the EN-CAMHS mixed-methods study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: National Health Service Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services are specialist teams that assess and treat children and young people with mental health problems. Overall, 497,502 children were referred to National Health Service Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services between 2020 and 2021, and almost one-quarter of these referrals were not successful. Unsuccessful referrals are often distressing for children and families who are turned away usually after a long waiting period and without necessarily being redirected to alternative services. The process is also costly to services because time is wasted reviewing documents about children who should have been referred for alternative help and may prevent young people who need specialist help receiving it in a timely way. The overarching aim of this study was to understand what the problems are with Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services referrals and identify solutions that could improve referral success. A key objective was to talk widely with young people and families, people working in Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services and mental health professionals so that we could understand fully what the problems were and how we might develop their solutions. We gathered individual pseudonymised patient data from nine Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services, and referral data from four National Health Service Trusts to look at what data are available and how complete it is. We report wide variation in the numbers of referrals between and within Trusts and in the proportions not being successful for treatment. Data on factors such as age and gender of children and young people referred into Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services and who made the referral are routinely collected, but ethnicity of the children and young people's reason for referral are not as well collected across all Trusts. We also conducted focus groups with over 100 individuals with differing perspectives on the Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services referral process (children and young people, parents and carers, key referrers, and Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services professionals) and asked about current difficulties within the referral process, as well as potential solutions to these. Conclusions: Problems identified included: confusion about what Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services is for, that is what it does and does not provide; and lack of support provided during the referral process. Possible solutions included: streamlining the referral pathways through digital technologies with accompanying standardisation of referral forms for National Health Service Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services; and early ongoing communication throughout the referral 'journey' for the referrer/family. Future work: Should consider the standardisation of and improvement to the Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services referral process following the recommendations outlined in this project. Study registration: This study is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov with the identifier: NCT05412368. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05412368. Funding: ; Vol. 13, No. 21. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.
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 | 0.020 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".