MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2087216786 · doi:10.7870/cjcmh-2001-0019

The Case for Standards for Youth in Custody in Canada

2001· article· en· W2087216786 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Carla Cesaroni

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Community Mental Health · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild Abuse and Trauma
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCLARITYEconomic JusticeBest practiceGovernment (linguistics)Political scienceFoundation (evidence)Residential carePublic relationsLawPsychologyNursingMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada has no standards, procedural guidelines, or protocols for best practices in the care of youths in custody. This paper argues that clear, enforceable standards are important in defining a benchmark of acceptable practice. It argues that without standards, issues may arise which can create further difficulty for youths who are under the care of the state. It suggests that the current legal framework for standards is insufficient in its enforceability and its clarity. The new Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA) provides the Canadian government with a timely and much-needed opportunity to establish standards of care for youths in custody. Indeed, the YCJA contains specific, comprehensive, and relevant provisions that can be seen as laying a firm foundation for standards of care.

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)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.079
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.151
Threshold uncertainty score0.985

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.079
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0270.019
Scholarly communication0.0140.007
Open science0.0050.009
Research integrity0.0140.026
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.299 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations3
Published2001
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Community Mental HealthSame topicChild Abuse and TraumaFrench-language works237,207