MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1491341354 · doi:10.7202/039130ar

La prescription de médicaments psychotropes aux personnes incarcérées dans les prisons provinciales du Québec

2010· article· fr· W1491341354 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Denis Lafortune, Marion Vacheret

Bibliographic record

VenueSanté mentale au Québec · 2010
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedical prescriptionPolypharmacyMedicinePsychiatryAntipsychoticAnxietyPopulationSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Nursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, the authors attempt to better examine the practice of prescription of psychotropic medication of inmates of Québec's correctional facilities. Although prescription of this medication is considered the most widespread "psychiatric treatment," studies on the prevalence of these prescriptions remain scarce. The study includes a sample of 671 inmates, 500 men and 171 women. Globally, 40,3 % of inmates have received at least one prescription for psychotropic medication in the period between 2002 and 2007. Results show that women are more likely than men to have been prescribed medication. Inmates who have received at least one prescription are older than other inmates. Most prescriptions have been given by physicians and the cases of polypharmacy are numerous. On a period of five years, the class of medication the most widely prescribed is the following: anxiety/hypnotic medication, antidepressants and antipsychotic medication. The authors conclude that further analysis of factors associated with prescription of this class of medication of this population is needed.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.105

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.313
Teacher spread0.292 · 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

Citations5
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSanté mentale au QuébecSame topicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual OffendingFrench-language works237,207