MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2017008127 · doi:10.1353/pbm.2001.0062

Muscle Dysmorphia: A Critical Review of the Proposed Criteria

2001· review· en· W2017008127 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.

Bibliographic record

VenuePerspectives in biology and medicine · 2001
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBody Image and Dysmorphia Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBody dysmorphic disorderAnorexia nervosaPsychologyEating disordersSubcategoryClinical psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While body-image related disorders such as anorexia nervosa have focused on thinness, only recently have clinical criteria for a disorder that centers around muscularity--muscle dysmorphia--been proposed. An individual affected by muscle dysmorphia is overly concerned with his or her degree of muscularity. This preoccupation is manifested in the individual's behavior (excessive weight lifting, excessive attention to diet, social impairment). This article examines the historical aspects and proposed criteria for muscle dysmorphia and contrasts them with those of anorexia nervosa. While the authors of the proposed criteria have suggested that muscle dysmorphia be classified as a subcategory of body dysmorphic disorder, both the historical and clinical aspects of this syndrome are more consistent with its classification as an obsessive-compulsive disorder.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.889
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.494
Teacher spread0.384 · 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