Brain injury in a forensic psychiatry population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The prevalence and profile of adults with a history of traumatic brain injury (TBI) has not been studied in large North American forensic mental health populations. This study investigated how adults with a documented history of TBI differed with the non-TBI forensic population with respect to demographics, psychiatric diagnoses and history of offences. METHOD: A retrospective chart review of all consecutive admissions to a forensic psychiatry programme in Toronto, Canada was conducted. Information on history of TBI, psychiatric diagnoses, living environments and types of criminal offences were obtained from medical records. RESULTS: History of TBI was ascertained in 23% of 394 eligible patient records. Compared to those without a documented history of TBI, persons with this history were less likely to be diagnosed with schizophrenia but more likely to have alcohol/substance abuse disorder. There were also differences observed with respect to offence profiles. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence to support routine screening for a history of TBI in forensic psychiatry.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".