MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414419461 · doi:10.1186/s13034-025-00948-8

Brief admission by self-referral for adolescents who self-harm: discourses on involvement and responsibility among parents and other significant adults

2025· article· en· W4414419461 on OpenAlexaff
Reid Lantto, Kajsa Landgren, Sophia Eberhard, Björn Johansson, Olof Rask, Sofie Westling

Bibliographic record

VenueChild and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMental Health and Patient Involvement
Canadian institutionsChild, Adolescent and Family Mental Health
FundersLunds Universitet
KeywordsMental healthChild and adolescent psychiatryNarrativeForensic psychiatryHealth careMental healthcareLiteracySuicide preventionChild protection

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Brief Admission by self-referral (BA) was implemented in 2018 in Swedish child and adolescent psychiatric (CAP) inpatient care. This intervention empowers adolescents to self-admit at their own request for brief periods to prevent self-harm and suicidal crisis. As BA enhances healthcare user autonomy, it is a timely intervention to consider with the emerging human rights discourse and rising imperatives for person-centered care in psychiatry. The present study explores talk about adolescents access to BA specifically in terms of involvement and responsibilities of parents and other significant adults in CAP. METHODS: In this qualitative study, we interviewed 26 significant adults (the majority being biological parents) of children with access to BA. Interviews were semi-structured, asking broadly about participants' experiences with BA. We used reflexive thematic analysis from a social constructionist framework to explore how participants' narratives drew on existing psychiatric discourses. RESULTS: We constructed four themes around narratives of involvement and responsibilities in BA specifically and CAP generally: there's no need to be involved in BA, selflessly supporting child involvement, being insufficiently involved, and being left to shoulder everything. These themes illustrate a sliding scale from perceiving little responsibility nor need for involvement, to perceiving shared responsibility for children's well-being but limited personal rights, to being under-involved and even perceptions of being left with sole responsibility as CAP refused to provide care. CONCLUSIONS: Participants' narratives could generally be mapped onto rights-based discourse, emphasizing that adolescents should have access to BA as it helped them care for themselves. As participants took various positions regarding the responsibility of parents versus CAP to protect and help adolescents, the risk of perpetually downplaying the needs of parents and other significant adults became apparent, along with the pitfalls of neoliberal healthcare management and responsibilization of child mental health. CAP ought to systematically inform both adolescents and significant adults about BA, strengthening mental health literacy among the target population. It also ought to be emphasized that supporting significant others is considered part of the purpose with BA.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.014
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.334 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChild and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental HealthSame topicMental Health and Patient InvolvementFrench-language works237,207