MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Impact of legal reform on the practice of forensic psychiatry in Chile

2004· article· en· W1973178636 on OpenAlexaff
Carlos Téllez, Julio Arboleda‐Flórez, Sofía González Ortiz, Javiera Navarro

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Psychiatry · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForensic psychiatryLegal processForensic scienceCriminal justiceLaw reformLatin AmericansPolitical scienceEconomic JusticePsychiatryLegal researchField (mathematics)PsychologyCriminologyLawMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose of review Codes of criminal procedure are being modified in Latin American countries as part of a movement of legal reform to make justice more accessible and the application of the law more transparent in these countries. This review summarizes the impact of that process in the practice of forensic psychiatry in Chile. Recent findings While existing data deal with the general impact that legal reform has had in Chile, a search of Medline and Embase databases found no published study analysing the influence of this type of legal reform on the practice of forensic psychiatry. Summary The paper describes the penal system in Chile, presents general sociodemographic information, and describes characteristics of the work of expert witnesses within the new system. The penal reform and its impacts on forensic psychiatry have generated an increased awareness of the field and given impetus to academic development of the study and research into forensic psychiatry issues.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.356 · 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
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in PsychiatrySame topicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual OffendingFrench-language works237,207