MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7097420598

Original Research Toward Benchmarks for Tertiary Care for Adults With Severe and Persistent Mental Disorders

2014· article· en· W7097420598 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTertiary careCatchment areaMental healthResidential careNeeds assessmentOriginal researchPrimary care
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Scarce attention has been paid to establishing benchmarks for tertiary care for adults with severe mental disorders. Yet, the availability and efficient utilization of resi-dential resources partly determines the capacity of a comprehensive system of care to avoid clogging ever-shrinking acute care bed facilities. Objectives: To describe the actual utilization of and projected needs for residential re-sources, one part of tertiary care, in the catchment area of a psychiatric hospital in east-end Montreal. To compare results obtained against actual utilization and projected needs evalu-ated in other Canadian provinces and in other countries, with a view to establishing na-tional benchmarks. Methods: Two surveys were undertaken to establish the number of places in these facili-ties that were utilized and needed for adults aged 18 to 65 years with severe mental disor-ders, without a primary diagnosis of mental retardation or organic brain syndrome, and originally from the catchment area. A first survey ascertained the number of places utilized and of those needed for residential care among all long-stay inpatients and all adults in supervised residential facilities. A second survey identified the need for such long-stay

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)0.034
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.098
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.178

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0340.098
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSchizophrenia research and treatment→French-language works237,207→