MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2020330718 · doi:10.1037/0033-3204.44.1.117

Review of The American Psychiatric Publishing Textbook of Personality Disorders.

2007· article· en· W2020330718 on OpenAlexaff
David J. Hellerstein

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychotherapy · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPersonality Disorders and Psychopathology
Canadian institutionsColumbia College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyPsycINFOPersonality disordersPublishingFrontierDepictionPersonality psychologyPersonalityPsychiatryBorderline personality disorderPsychoanalysisMEDLINEHistoryArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviews the book, The American Psychiatric Publishing Textbook of Personality Disorders edited by John M. Oldham, Andrew E. Skodol, and Donna S. Bender (see record 2005-05013-000). Definitive, encyclopedic, and somewhat daunting, The American Psychiatric Publishing Textbook of Personality Disorders is a monument to the progress of contemporary psychiatry and related disciplines in understanding and treating the Axis II disorders--as well as to its limitations. One may properly ask, how well does this volume succeed in providing guidance for professionals who work with individuals diagnosed with personality disorders? To a large degree, I believe it succeeds. With all its exciting insights into the impact of trauma, the interaction between genes, serotonin and impulsive behavior, and so forth, and with its occasional frustrations, the Textbook of Personality Disorders provides an accurate, in-depth depiction of a true frontier of psychiatry. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved).

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)0.005
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.241

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0720.079

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.328 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychotherapySame topicPersonality Disorders and PsychopathologyFrench-language works237,207