MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969700560 · doi:10.1177/0306624x01454007

Multidimensional Assessment of Young Male Offenders in Penal Institutions

2001· article· en· W1969700560 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Günter Hinrichs

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyPersonality disordersClinical psychologyAggressionPsychiatryTest (biology)PersonalityQuarter (Canadian coin)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On the assumption of psychotherapy indication, a multidimensional assessment was carried out in a study group consisting of 103 imprisoned male offenders (mean age 20.8 years). It included a demographic and personal history inventory, psychological tests, and diagnosis according to the multiaxial classification. In addition, psychotherapy adherence was categorized, and therapy objectives were formulated. Participants showed multiple developmental risk factors and average-to-good results in language-free IQ-test scores. Furthermore, they displayed a more-pronounced negative attitude to life and higher rates of aggression toward themselves. Main ICD-10 disorders included personality and behavior disorders, substance use disorders, conduct disorders, and emotional disorders. The spectrum of psychiatric morbidity within the psychotherapy group was largely comparable with that of imprisoned and forensic populations, whereas the total prevalence was slightly higher. A quarter of the original sample failed after five test sessions to fulfill the final indication for a subsequent psychotherapeutic treatment.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.371
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.074 · 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

Citations6
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative CriminologySame topicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual OffendingFrench-language works237,207