MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Early detection of psychosis: finding those at clinical high risk

2008· article· en· W2074290317 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

VenueEarly Intervention in Psychiatry · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of TorontoUniversity of CalgaryCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersNational Institute of Mental Health
KeywordsGeneralizability theoryPsychosisProdromePsychiatryPsychologyMedicineClinical psychologyDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: In early detection work, recruiting individuals who meet the prodromal criteria is difficult. The aim of this paper was to describe the development of a research clinic for individuals who appear to be at risk of developing a psychosis and the process for educating the community and obtaining referrals. METHODS: The outcome of all referrals to the clinic over a 4-year period was examined. RESULTS: Following an ongoing education campaign that was over inclusive in order to aid recruitment, approximately 27% of all referrals met the criteria for being at clinical high risk of psychosis. CONCLUSIONS: We are seeing only a small proportion of those in the community who eventually go on to develop a psychotic illness. This raises two important issues, namely how to remedy the situation, and second, the impact of this on current research in terms of sampling bias and generalizability of research findings.

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)0.000
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.572

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.328 · 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