MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

La práctica de la evaluación del riesgo de violencia en España

2015· article· es· W1957334684 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista de la Facultad de Medicina · 2015
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPublic Health and Social Inequalities
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La valoración del riesgo de violencia es un requisito fundamental en la toma de decisiones profesionales que implican prevenir, intervenir o informar sobre la conducta de las personas. El uso de herramientas estructuradas mejora la precisión de las evaluaciones basadas en el juicio clínico en contextos psiquiátricos, penitenciarios y jurídicos. Este estudio presenta resultados de la primera encuesta sobre el uso de herramientas de evaluación del riesgo de violencia y sobre su utilidad percibida en España. Las escalas de psicopatía (PCL-R y PCL:SV) y el HCR-20 encabezaron la lista de las herramientas más usadas tanto por elección personal como por requisito institucional. Se ofrecen datos novedosos sobre las prácticas profesionales de evaluación del riesgo de violencia que pueden orientar a los profesionales que desempeñan su tarea en contextos sanitarios, correccionales y forenses, donde los instrumentos estructurados son frecuentemente usados para asistirlos en la toma de<br />decisiones.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.035
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.851
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0350.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.405 · 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