MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2066015509 · doi:10.1177/1039856212460598

Indicators of psychoses or psychoses as indicators: the relationship between Indigenous social disadvantage and serious mental illness

2012· article· en· W2066015509 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ernest Hunter

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralasian Psychiatry · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousDisadvantageMental illnessMental healthVulnerability (computing)PopulationPsychiatryPsychologyMedicineEnvironmental healthPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To explore the relationship between Indigenous social disadvantage and serious mental illness. CONCLUSIONS: Rapidly changing patterns of mental disorders in Indigenous populations indicate the importance of social determinants. Canadian research on Native American suicide has demonstrated a clear link between social control factors and one mental health issue - completed suicide - a finding with major social policy implications. This work has not been replicable in Australia, reflecting the particular political and social circumstances of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander populations. Recent research motivated by clinicians' observations of an increase in psychotic disorders in the Indigenous populations of Cape York and the Torres Strait has demonstrated that the prevalence is high and that there are within-population differences. Given similar exposure to social disadvantage, these findings raise the possibility of utilising Indigenous psychosis prevalence as a metric to inform a more nuanced understanding of the predictors of wider vulnerability and resilience at a setting level, and as a policy and service development lever.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.337 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations16
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralasian PsychiatrySame topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207