Cited by 11Psychiatric care and mental health servicesMental Health Treatment and AccessChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development

The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.

Transparent criteria for specialist level adolescent psychiatric care

Kaltiala-Heino, Riittakerttu, Fröjd, Sari, Autio, Ville, Laukkanen, Eila, Närhi, Pekka, Rantanen, Päivi·2007·European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry

Abstract

Background Rising health care costs and long waiting lists pose a challenge to public specialist level health services. In Finland, the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health required all medical specialities to create a priority-rating tool for elective patients, preferably giving a numerical rating ranging 0-100, with 50 as an entry threshold.Objective To create and test the psychometric properties of a point-count measure for prioritising entry to public specialist level adolescent psychiatric services.Method Around 710 referred adolescents were given ratings on 17 items focusing on symptom severity, problem behaviours, functioning, progress of adolescent development and prognosis. The structured ratings were compared to an overall assessment of need for treatment on a VAS scale. In order to ensure that the tool was not inappropriately sensitive to confounding by non-disturbance related factors, the associations between the structured priority rating and sex, age, referring agent, study site and diagnosis were analysed.Results Of the 17 items, 15 were included in the final priority-rating tool. The requirement than threshold score for entry to services being set at 50 points necessitated scoring factors rather than individual items. Four blocks of items were formed: symptoms and risks; impaired functioning; other relevant issues, and prognosis without specialist level treatment. Most of the referred adolescents scored over the threshold of 50. When diagnosis was controlled for, scoring over 50 was largely independent of age, sex, referring agent or study site.Conclusion The structured priority ratings corresponded well with clinical global rating of need for care. The tool was not inappropriately sensitive to age, sex, referring agent or study site. In the future, follow-up studies will be needed to evaluate the predictive value of priority ratings.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00787-006-0598-4

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

The citation lists are queued

They are fetched later and appear here then.

References 24 · Cited by 11

Metadata

Authors
Kaltiala-Heino, R., Fröjd, S., Autio, V., Laukkanen, E., Närhi, P., & Rantanen, P.
Affiliations
  • Kuopio University Hospital (FI)
  • Helsinki University Hospital (FI)
  • Tampere University Hospital (FI)
Venue
European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry
Published
2006-12-14
Volume
16
Issue
4
Pages
260-270
ISSN
  • 1018-8827 (ISSN-L)
  • 1435-165X
OpenAlex
W1965792858
Cited by
11
References
24
Citations by year
2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1
FWCI
0.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychiatric care and mental health services
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Keywords
adolescent psychiatric care, waiting lists, psychometric properties, symptom severity, functioning impairment, prognosis, Finland
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adolescent Psychiatry, Adult, Mental Disorders, Child, Female, Finland, Health Policy, Health Priorities, Health Services Needs and Demand, Humans, Male, National Health Programs, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Psychometrics, Referral and Consultation, Severity of Illness Index, Health Care Surveys

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Transparent criteria for specialist level adolescent psychiatric care. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s00787-006-0598-4
The paper
Kaltiala-Heino, R., Fröjd, S., Autio, V., Laukkanen, E., Närhi, P., & Rantanen, P. (2007). Transparent criteria for specialist level adolescent psychiatric care. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00787-006-0598-4