MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2024197933 · doi:10.1097/paf.0b013e318148bdb2

Asphyxial Games in Children and Adolescents

2007· article· en· W2024197933 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

VenueAmerican Journal of Forensic Medicine & Pathology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRestraint-Related Deaths
Canadian institutionsOffice of the Chief Medical Examiner
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsphyxiaRealmCertificationPsychologyPediatricsMedicineMedical emergencyDevelopmental psychologyPsychiatryPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Asphyxial games, as played by young adolescents, and going by various names, are not new phenomena. What seems to be different at present is an increase in lethality introduced by the increasing use of ligatures and "playing" the game alone. The authors present a properly certified but insufficiently appreciated case followed 2 years later by 2 closely spaced but unrelated deaths in young adolescent males that made known this practice in New Hampshire youth. Other cases presented to the author from other jurisdictions are reviewed in aggregate. Presented are characteristics of victims of this practice that may help distinguish these deaths from suicidal asphyxia. A relative paucity of literature regarding asphyxial games outside the realm of autoerotic asphyxia gives rise to certification difficulties given the high prevalence of youth suicide.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.312
Threshold uncertainty score0.600

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.270 · 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