MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1976391083 · doi:10.1159/000085773

Can Teachers’ Behavior Ratings Be Used to Screen Early Adolescent Boys for Psychiatric Diagnoses?

2005· article· en· W1976391083 on OpenAlex
René Carbonneau, Richard E. Tremblay, Frank Vitaro, Jean‐François Saucier

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

VenuePsychopathology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalResearch Unit on Children's Psychosocial Maladjustment
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedical diagnosisPsychologyPsychiatryFalse positive paradoxSocioeconomic statusPsychiatric diagnosisClinical psychologyRating scaleDevelopmental psychologyMedicinePopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study examined if a short, 22-item teacher rating questionnaire could be used to screen young adolescent boys for psychiatric diagnoses. Subjects were 239 12-year-old boys from a community sample of low socioeconomic status families. Child and parent versions of the Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children were used to provide DSM-III-R diagnoses. Results show a low to moderate screening value for the Short Social Behavior Questionnaire (S-SBQ) scales, with best results for externalizing disorders. The method used to establish the diagnoses had an impact on the screening efficacy of the S-SBQ, higher prevalence rates resulting in a lower proportion of false-positives for the same cutoff point. Additional research is needed to assess the screening efficacy of the S-SBQ across ages and gender, but results suggest that teacher ratings with the S-SBQ could be used to screen boys with externalizing disorders at the end of elementary school.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.318
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.322
Teacher spread0.287 · 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