The Development of a Canadian Prison Based Program for Offenders with Mental Illnesses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A relatively large number of individuals entering the criminal justice system have a mental illness. Perhaps as many as 6% to 15% of inmates in North America have a serious mental illness, exceeding the rate found in the general population (Hodgins & Cote, 1990; Ogloff, Roesch, & Hart, 1994; Teplin, 1990). To increase the range of services available to MDOs, a number of initiatives have been undertaken in British Columbia, including the development of a prison-based mental health program. The Program has been designed for provincial offenders with a major mental illness to be conducted across a five-month (20-week) period, emphasizing the treatment and management of the offender's illness as well as the interruption of the offender's crime cycle. Currently still under development, the Program has adopted a graduated or multi-tiered approach to treatment with program content presented to participants across three distinct phases: (1) the comprehensive psychodiagnostic phase, (2) the intensive treatment phase, and (3) the community re-integration preparation phase. The purpose of this paper was to describe the Mental Health Program and to highlight important research upon which the program model was predicated.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".