Bibliographic record
Abstract
Psyche in the Lab: Celebrating Brain Science in Canada Authors: Mary V Seeman, Neil Seeman Hogrefe & Huber Publishers, 2006 US$24.95; pp258; ISBN: 978-0-88937-304-3 Psychiatric illnesses are traditionally classified into 2 major categories, namely organic and functional. This distinction derives from the observations of eminent 19th century neuropathologists, like Alzheimer, Broca and Wernicke, who examined the brains of patients at autopsy. Diseases were termed organic if there were anatomically identifiable lesions in the brain, while those lacking these features were called functional. After this period, research into psychiatric illnesses became stagnant. This was partly due to the complexity of the brain and the slow maturation of neuroscience when it lacked sophisticated technological tools for investigation. But it was also due to the longheld doctrine of a mind-body dichotomy and the transient separation from biological medicine in the mid-20th century, when the psychoanalytic model dominated psychiatric practice. Psychiatry was stigmatised as the Cinderella specialty in medicine, and regarded as being without rigorous scientific foundation. Treatments like spa therapy, malarial fever cures, insulin coma therapy etc. came on and then off the stage and sank into oblivion due to the lack of sound scientific evidence supporting them. With the serendipitous discovery of psychopharmacology, the establishment of clinically validated and objective diagnostic criteria and the recent advances in neuroimaging and genetic studies, there has been a quantum leap in the understanding of the psyche, the brain and therefore the psychiatric illnesses. Eric R Kandel, a psychiatrist and the Nobel Laureate in Medicine in 2000, stated that the distinction between organic and functional categories is outdated and no longer tenable. The basis of the new intellectual framework for psychiatry is that all mental processes are biological with functions of the mind reflecting functions of the brain. Embracing neuroscience and genetics will surely help unveil the mysteries of mental illness, which will in turn benefit patients. The book, Psyche in the Lab: Celebrating Brain Science in Canada, which commemorates the 25th anniversary of the Canadian Psychiatric Research Foundation, echoes their vision and unfailing efforts toward researching the science of the mind in the psychiatric field. This book is based on a series of interviews with scientists, philanthropists and those who have experienced mental illness. The book is divided into 2 parts. Section I depicts the stories of researchers. Though scientific facts and figures abound in the text, the foreword is reserved for personal stories of ambition, hardship and triumph in psychiatric research. The research encompasses a diverse range of topics such as inflammation and dementia, memory and neuroimaging, depression and mindfulness-based cognitive therapy, seasonal affective disorder and light therapy, autism and genetic study, to name a few. Section II is devoted to benefactors and beneficiaries. It comprises the experiences of research fund donors as well as recipients of mental health services. It is inspiring to read first person accounts of how they have struggled, fought back and finally recovered from or learned to live with their mental illnesses with dignity and integrity. For instance, Michael, who was once entrapped by schizophrenia with low self-esteem, depression and a sense of isolation, finally manages to walk out of the shadow and find new meaning in life via art work (Chapter 18). And, despite the waxing and waning of her psychotic symptoms, Marier tries her best to keep on donating a portion of her earnings from sales of her work to psychiatric research (Chapter 27). Patient's views of treatment and recovery do not always concur with medical opinion and criteria. …
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".