MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2015981506 · doi:10.1163/157181808x301809

"It's Like Mental Torture": Participation and Mental Health Services

2008· article· en· W2015981506 on OpenAlexaff
Brenda A. LeFrançois

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Journal of Children s Rights · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEthics and Legal Issues in Pediatric Healthcare
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthTortureAuthoritarianismMental illnessCompliance (psychology)Unit (ring theory)InstitutionPsychiatryNursingProtectionismChild rightsPsychologyMedicineHuman rightsPolitical scienceSocial psychologyLawPoliticsBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article discusses findings from an ethnographic research study looking at the ways in which children's participation rights are incorporated within an adolescent mental health inpatient unit. The practitioners working within this setting have reinterpreted the concept of 'participation' to suit a coercive agenda associated with the authoritarian medical model of treatment used within child psychiatry. Indeed, the use of the term 'participation' has become a tool to enforce children's compliance with adult (and practitioner) determined treatment plans. For the most part, the barriers to according children's participation rights within this setting relate to the institution's and practitioners' protectionist stance vis-à-vis children who are deemed informally to be both vulnerable and incompetent.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.012
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0020.004
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.331 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations44
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Journal of Children s RightsSame topicEthics and Legal Issues in Pediatric HealthcareFrench-language works237,207