Review of The secret illness: Part one: Understanding obsessive compulsive disorder. Part two: Managing obsessive compulsive behavior in schools..
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
CLARE MULLEN, PRODUCER Secret Illness. Part One. Obsessive Compulsive Disorder. Part Two: Obsessive Compulsive Behavior in Schools. Edmonton, ON: Dymphna Productions, 2000, two video tapes, 33 minutes each. (C$195 each or $345 the set; Fax: (780)432-7309) Reviewed by AIDAN STOKES Producer Clare Mullen undertook the production of the two-video set, The Secret Illness, with a group of clinicians, educators, and parents of children with Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD) in an effort to help families and teachers understand and cope with the disorder. Part I, entitled Understanding Obsessive Compulsive Disorder in Children, deals with the impact of the disorder on children and their families, while Part II, Managing Obsessive Compulsive Behaviour in Schools, offers education about the disorder and outlines behavioural management strategies for school personnel. An educational videotape should inform but not overstate the difficulties with the disorder. Thus, the content of such videotape may seem bland in comparison to the depiction of the disorder in commercial TV productions, many of which serve to appal rather than inform through sensationalization of the subject in the interests of good television. Invariably, it seems that it is the most severe cases with the most bizarre symptoms that are portrayed. One of the main challenges for the producer of an educational videotape is to present material that is relevant to the majority of individuals with the disorder and their families, and to do so in an accurate, sympathetic, and hopeful manner. Information needs to be presented with a perspective sufficiently broad to allow most with the disorder to identify with some of the individuals portrayed. approach should be balanced and realistic and reflect current knowledge of the disorder. In applying the above criteria to The Secret Illness, how well does this venture succeed? With rather mixed success, in my view: Certain segments are excellent, while others are somewhat pedestrian. Part I commences with an overview of OCD provided by a psychologist and a psychiatrist. information presented is generally accurate, but certain key findings in the literature have been either minimized or omitted. In contrast to the data presented, it is now generally accepted that approximately 2% of children and adolescents are estimated to be affected by OCD (Zohar, 1999). Further, there is scant reference made to subcategories and co-morbidities, and given that these are often important in treatment planning, their omission is notable. There was also little mention of the familial or genetic contributions to the disorder. next segment of the video shows clips of interviews with children as they discuss their symptoms and the impact upon them. These are handled sensitively with a couple of poignant reminders of the severity of the impact of this disorder on quite young children. However, one segment with a young man whose face was hidden, presumably in the interests of confidentiality, was upsetting to one parent whom I asked to review the video. She commented [it was as] if he had committed a crime. next segment where parents discussed how they coped with having OCD in the family is perhaps the most disappointing due to the heavy emphasis on the difficulties encountered, with little discussion of the strategies which the parents might use in dealing with a child with the disorder. section on treatment covered the empirically supported treatments but not in sufficient detail. Drug treatment is suggested as the primary mode of intervention in the disorder. Certainly, pharmacological intervention plays a major role in the treatment of childhood OCD and is often effective, but little attention was paid to its pitfalls, including nonresponse and partial response as well as some of the adverse effects of drug treatment. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,005 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,006 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».