MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2022582825 · doi:10.1159/000287762

Epidemiology of Psychosomatic Disorders in Schizophrenic Patients: Methodological Issues

2010· article· en· W2022582825 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

VenuePsychotherapy and Psychosomatics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods in Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpidemiologyPsychiatryRepresentativeness heuristicInter-rater reliabilityMedical diagnosisSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)PopulationPsychologyPsychiatric diagnosisClinical psychologyPsychiatric epidemiologyMedicineMental healthDevelopmental psychologyRating scale

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The value of an epidemiological study investigating the prevalence of certain somatoform diseases in schizophrenic patients can be strengthened by attention to the following methodological principles: (1) sufficient size of sample; (2) representativeness of sample, controlling if possible such variables as age range, inpatient or outpatient status, ward population or milieu and cultural aspects; (3) study of control groups in same milieu with other psychiatric diagnoses; (4) clear specification of diagnostic criteria employed; (5) establishment of interrater reliability concerning psychiatric diagnosis, patient historical data or medical record information.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.660
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.178
GPT teacher head0.497
Teacher spread0.319 · 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