MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2003913288 · doi:10.1097/hrp.0000000000000012

Allostatic Load as a Tool for Monitoring Physiological Dysregulations and Comorbidities in Patients with Severe Mental Illnesses

2013· review· en· W2003913288 on OpenAlexaff
Gustáv Bízik, Martin Picard, Rami Nijjar, Valérie Tourjman, Bruce S. McEwen, Sonia Lupien, Robert‐Paul Juster

Bibliographic record

VenueHarvard Review of Psychiatry · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAllostatic loadAllostasisPsychosocialPsychological interventionMedicineMental healthSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)ComorbidityPsychiatryMental illnessPsychologyClinical psychologyGerontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Severe mental illnesses like schizophrenia and bipolar disorder are disabling, chronic conditions that are often accompanied by medical comorbidities. In this theoretical article, we review the allostatic load model representing the "wear and tear" that chronic stress exacts on the brain and body. We propose an innovative way of monitoring physical and psychiatric comorbidities by integrating the allostatic load model into clinical practice. By interpreting peripheral biomarkers differently, medical professionals can calculate a simple, count-based, allostatic load index known to predict diverse stress-related pathologies. In addition to screening for comorbidities, allostatic load indices can be used to monitor the effects of pharmacological and psychosocial interventions. This framework can also be used to generate a dialogue between patient and practitioner to promote preventive and proactive approaches to health care.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.313
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

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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations68
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHarvard Review of PsychiatrySame topicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic ControlFrench-language works237,207