MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2066293892 · doi:10.1097/acm.0b013e31813ffedd

Effects Associated with Adolescent Standardized Patient Simulation of Depression and Suicidal Ideation

2007· article· en· W2066293892 on OpenAlexaff
Mark D. Hanson, Anne Niec, Anna Marie Pietrantonio, Samantha Johnson, Meredith Young, Harriet L. MacMillan, Kevin W. Eva

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademic Medicine · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSuicide and Self-Harm Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSuicidal ideationDepression (economics)Clinical psychologyPsychologyAssociation (psychology)Suicide preventionPsychiatryIdeationPoison controlMedicinePsychotherapistMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Because of common use of adolescent simulated patients (ASPs), clarification of the risk of negative effects associated with high-stress simulations is essential. This study evaluates the safety of suicidality simulations. METHOD: ASPs participated in a suicidality role or pediatric role. Explicit measures of their impact included the Suicidal Ideation Questionnaire (SIQ) and Reynolds Adolescent Depression Scale-2 (RADS-2), both of which were completed pre-/poststudy. Implicit behavioral measures of impact were also collected during training, including the Implicit Association Test. RESULTS: Three of the 24 participants had clinical RADS-2 and/or SIQ scores. None of these adolescents' mental status deteriorated with SP participation. ASPs in the suicidality role showed behavioral effects consistent with a negative reaction, and two reported brief depression. CONCLUSIONS: ASPs participated in a suicidality simulation without evidence of suicide contagion. However, ASPs' behavioral reactions and self-reported depression suggested a transient depressive reaction.

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)0.001
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 score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.359

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.343
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

Citations29
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademic MedicineSame topicSuicide and Self-Harm StudiesFrench-language works237,207