Integration of physical and mental health services for children and young people with eating disorders and functional symptom disorders: discrete choice experiment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Given the increasing recognition of the value of greater integration of physical and mental health services for children and young people, we aimed to evaluate preferences among parents for the characteristics associated with integrated health service provision for two conditions (eating disorders, functional symptom disorders). Methods Two discrete choice experiments (DCEs) were conducted, using electronic surveys. Participants were adult parents of children and young people. Choice scenarios were based on five attributes for the eating disorders study, and four attributes for the functional symptom disorders study. Results Two hundred parents participated in each DCE. For eating disorders, days missed from school in the last year was the attribute valued most highly, followed by days in hospital in the last year, costs to the NHS, functioning, and interaction with peers with eating disorders. Respondents were willing to trade £531 of costs to the NHS for one less day missed from school. For functional symptom disorders, time to diagnosis was valued most highly, followed by days missed from school while obtaining a diagnosis, reservations about seeing a mental health practitioner, and costs of diagnosis to the NHS. Respondents were willing to trade £4237 of costs to the NHS to wait one month less for a diagnosis. Conclusion Respondents’ preferences were largely consistent with the planned goals of integrating physical and mental health services. Our findings show the factors which ought to be considered when designing new integrated pathways and evaluating them.
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 | 0.011 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 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".