1 row is stored for this page
| Field | Field type | Value |
|---|
| _modificationDate | Datetime | 2025-10-29 9:21:30 PM |
| _categories | List of String, delimiter: | | Admit/Discharge • Data Collection Guide • Pre-acute living situation • Questions • Registry Data |
| _pageID | Integer | 4,917 |
| _pageName | Page | Selkirk Mental Health Centre |
| _pageTitle | String | Selkirk Mental Health Centre
|
| _pageNamespace | Integer | 0 |
2 rows are stored for this page
| Field | Field type | Value |
|---|
| who | Text | Task |
| question | Wikitext | |
| Field | Field type | Value |
|---|
| who | Text | Tina |
| question | Wikitext | - I am unclear with these instructions, if indirect code as applicable? if we are using chronic care facility, like we do for Riverview and Deer Lodge (DLC), we have Riverview as an option for if they arrive as a direct or indirect, but now Deer Lodge (DLC) and Selkirk mental health are not an option, shouldn't we be treating these all the same? There is a question on the Chronic Health Facility Lisa Kaita 17:50, 16 June 2025 (CDT)
- I agree we should treat them the same. Also, there is now Eden Mental Health Centre in Winkler, which is listed together with Selkirk on the File:GRA ALC Form.pdf. Selkirk groups together with PCHs when reported, so to treat Eden similar to Selkirk in the absence of separate record, the most consistent coding would be "Manitoba PCH outside of Winnipeg". That is probably not where a user of our data would expect to find this. Should we consider any of the residential addiction treatment centres the same way (Bruce Oake Recovery Centre, Native Addictions Council of Manitoba, ...)?
|