MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Routine HIV Testing for the Severely Mentally Ill: Considerations and Cautions

2002· review· en· W2079619106 on OpenAlexaff
James Satriano

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Psychiatric Practice · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsColumbia College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental illnessMental healthPublic healthPsychiatryHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)PopulationMental health lawPsychologyConvergence (economics)MedicineFamily medicineEnvironmental healthNursingEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The last few decades have brought major changes in both mental health laws and AIDS public health laws. The author first examines the impact of the HIV epidemic on those with severe and persistent mental illness. He then discusses how changes in public health laws have affected those infected with HIV and how changes in mental health laws have affected those with mental illness. People suffering from severe mental illness are increasingly being held legally responsible for their personal actions. At the same time, AIDS public health laws have begun to change so that those infected with HIV enjoy less legal protection and have more personal responsibility for transmitting the virus to others than in the recent past. The author then considers what impact the convergence of these legal changes is likely to have on the growing population of people with mental illness who are infected with HIV. The article concludes with some practical recommendations concerning HIV assessment and treatment in individuals with severe and persistent mental illness.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.040
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.094

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.040
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0100.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.120
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Psychiatric PracticeSame topicHIV/AIDS Research and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207