Bibliographic record
Abstract
The stigma attached to mental illness, and to the people who have it, is a major obstacle to better care and to the improvement of the quality of their lives.1 The World Psychiatric Association has recently initiated a global programme against stigma and discrimination because of schizophrenia.2 Twenty countries are participating in the programme, and others have expressed their interest in joining.3 The programme of the World Psychiatric Association is different from others in three ways. Firstly, it begins by an examination of experiences that patients and their families have had since the illness started. The analysis of accounts of their experiences in relation to society serves to select targets for interventions that will aim to reduce stigma and its consequences. Secondly, it involves different social sectors—for example, health ministries, social welfare services, labour ministries, non-governmental organisations, and the media. Thirdly, the programme is not a campaign but a long term engagement. Because of the strategy adopted for the programme, its focus differs from one place to another. For example, in Canada, one of the first targets of the programme was a change in procedures used in emergency departments that …
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.040 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.022 | 0.024 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".