MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1605288832

Human Rights Violation and Chronic Symptoms of Ptsd

2015· article· en· W1605288832 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Vito Zepinic

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian social science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTorture, Ethics, and Law
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman rightsDeclarationDysfunctional familyConsciousnessConventionLawPolitical scienceIsolation (microbiology)Spanish Civil WarPsychologyCriminologyPsychiatry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The protection of human rights is problematic and almost universally broken during war, especially against civilians. The UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Geneva Convention 1949 define the essential rules and principles that apply in times of war and seek to protect people who are not or are no longer taking part in the hostilities. The study reported in this article was conducted among 54 patients who had survived war in the Balkans, either as the prisoners-of-war or civilians, who had reported the various types of the human rights violation during the war that caused development of chronic PTSD. The experience of war-trauma causes a form of one’s consciousness and experience of the self that is broken, limited, adualistically irrupted, and dysfunctional. Such chronic condition blocks the victims’ posttraumatic growth and leads the traumatised self into isolation from both the inner and the outer world.

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)0.002
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.288 · 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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian social scienceSame topicTorture, Ethics, and LawFrench-language works237,207