MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1980007261 · doi:10.1097/yco.0b013e32830aba12

History of psychiatry

2008· article· en· W1980007261 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Psychiatry · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHistorical Psychiatry and Medical Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsHistory of psychiatryScope (computer science)PsychiatryChild and adolescent psychiatryMedicinePsychologyPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The present review examines recent contributions to the evolving field of historical writing in psychiatry. RECENT FINDINGS: Interest in the history of psychiatry continues to grow, with an increasing emphasis on topics of current interest such as the history of psychopharmacology, electroconvulsive therapy, and the interplay between psychiatry and society. The scope of historical writing in psychiatry as of 2007 is as broad and varied as the discipline itself. SUMMARY: More than in other medical specialties such as cardiology or nephrology, treatment and diagnosis in psychiatry are affected by trends in the surrounding culture and society. Studying the history of the discipline provides insights into possible alternatives to the current crop of patent-protected remedies and trend-driven diagnoses.

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), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.876
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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.284 · 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