MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414181583 · doi:10.1192/j.eurpsy.2025.497

Adaptation and evaluation of the program based on Specialized Coordinated Care for First Psychotic Episode in Chile - OnTrackChile: preliminary results of implementation fidelity

2025· article· en· W4414181583 on OpenAlexaff
Rubén Alvarado, María Soledad Burrone, Fanny Leyton, María José Jorquera, Stefan Schilling, Iruma Bello, Diego Arancibia, Kim Fader, Sarah Conover, Lawrence H. Yang, Ezra Susser, Lisa B. Dixon, Leopoldo J. Cabassa

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Psychiatry · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychological Treatments and Disorders
Canadian institutionsColumbia College
FundersChinese University of Hong Kong
KeywordsFidelityScale (ratio)Adaptation (eye)Intervention (counseling)Mental healthSet (abstract data type)Control (management)Mental illness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction In high-income countries, Coordinated Specialized Care for First Psychotic Episode (FEP) programs have been shown to be effective in reducing symptoms and disability. Chile guarantees universal access to these services through a national policy, but previous research indicates that evidence-based approaches are not used. Our team adapted the OnTrackNY (OTNY) program to the Chilean context, called OnTrackChile (OTCH), to evaluate its effectiveness and implementation. This summary presents preliminary results on model fidelity, one of the primary outcomes of the study. Objectives To evaluate the fidelity of the implementation of the OTCH program in comparison with usual care services for FEP, analyzing its compliance in 18 key domains of care and its alignment with the National Mental Health Plan. Methods A fidelity scale was designed to guide data collection on OTCH implementation. The scale included the name and definition of each domain, along with a set of expectations. The scale assessed 18 key domains, such as staffing, team integration, communication, burden of care, service flexibility, crisis, treatment planning, prescribing, care management, working with families, and education and employment support, among others. The scale was applied in the 5 OTCH intervention sites and 8 control sites that maintained usual care included in the cluster-randomized controlled clinical trial. Results OTCH sites met more than 80% of the criteria for the domains assessed in the fidelity scale, which is more than twice the compliance observed in the control sites. In domains related to the usual functioning of the centers coincident with those established in the National Mental Health Plan, OTCH intervention sites exceeded compliance standards to control sites (p<0.001). In situations where the frequency of problems was similar between both types of centers, such as suicidal risk and risky substance use, OTCH centers showed significantly better performance (p<0.001) compared to control centers. Conclusions The implementation of the OTCH model has not only allowed the introduction of specific aspects of the program, but has also improved the overall performance of the centers in key areas defined by the National Mental Health Plan. This suggests that the implementation of OTCH in the Chilean context is not only feasible, but can also improve the quality of community mental health care. OnTrack Chile is funded by the U.S. National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH115502). Disclosure of Interest None Declared

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.729
Threshold uncertainty score0.486

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.341 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean PsychiatrySame topicPsychological Treatments and DisordersFrench-language works237,207