MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Prediction of Violence in Acute Psychiatric Units

2003· article· en· W2023138942 on OpenAlexaff
David Watts, Morven Leese, Stuart Thomas, Zerrin Atakan, Til Wykes

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Forensic Mental Health · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Health Services and Policy Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLogistic regressionPredictive valuePsychiatryPsychologyOutcome (game theory)Poison controlMedicineClinical psychologyMedical emergencyMathematicsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This is a prospective longitudinal study addressing the issue of predicting violence within two weeks of admission to two psychiatric units. Predictors of violence in 100 consecutive admissions were collected at baseline and tested on an outcome of violence. Risk factors were analyzed using logistic regression models and cross-validated using jack-knifing techniques. Two separate definitions of violence were used, actual assault on another person and aggressive behavior including attempted assault, violence to property and specific threats. Thirty-two patients actually assaulted, 41 behaved aggressively and 27 were completely non-violent. Two models were developed to predict membership according to these definitions. A single model based on a three-category outcome compared unfavorably with the two-model approach. Although the presence of recent pre-admission violence had some predictive value for both models, clinical variables were most predictive. “Non-violence” and “violence” appeared to be two separate states, and did not fit neatly on to a continuum. The two models were statistically robust, but should be tested prospectively on larger samples.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.463
Threshold uncertainty score0.501

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.320 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations62
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Forensic Mental HealthSame topicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual OffendingFrench-language works237,207