Gay Abuse Screening Protocol (GASP):Screening for Abuse in Gay Male Relationships
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Thirty-two male patients in gay relationships and eight family physicians were recruited from a family practice in order to determine comfort with an eight-question Gay Abuse Screening Protocol (GASP). The GASP was administered during a typical clinical encounter. After the encounter, physicians and patients each completed a 5-point Likert Scale questionnaire to assess their comfort levels with each of the 8 GASP questions (Likert Scale: 1 = not at all comfortable to 5 = very comfortable). The mean comfort score was high (Likert >4) for both patients (4.16 +/- 0.18) and physicians (4.71 +/- 0.18). However, mean comfort scores were significantly lower for abused patients (3.26 +/- 0.75) than nonabused patients (4.57 +/- 0.26). Patients were comfortable (Likert >3) with 76.2% of GASP items while physicians were comfortable with all GASP items.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it