MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100229527 · doi:10.1521/pedi.2005.19.3.315

Personality Disorder Research Agenda for the DSM–V

2005· review· en· W2100229527 on OpenAlexaff
Thomas A. Widiger, Erik Simonsen, Robert F. Krueger, W. John Livesley, Roel Verheul

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Personality Disorders · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPersonality Disorders and Psychopathology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Institute of Mental Health
KeywordsPsychologyPersonalityPersonality disordersPhenomenology (philosophy)Set (abstract data type)Association (psychology)NosologyPsychiatryPsychotherapistClinical psychologySocial psychologyEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The American Psychiatric Association is sponsoring a series of international conferences to set a research agenda for the development of the next edition of the diagnostic manual. The first conference in this series, "Dimensional Models of Personality Disorder: Etiology, Pathology, Phenomenology, and Treatment," was devoted to reviewing the existing research and setting a future research agenda that would be most effective in leading the field toward a dimensional classification of personality disorder. The purpose of this article, authored by the Steering Committee of this conference, was to provide a summary of the conference papers and their recommendations for research. Covered herein are the reviews and recommendations concerning alternative dimensional models of personality disorder, behavioral genetics and gene mapping, neurobiological mechanisms, childhood antecedents, cross-cultural issues, Axes I and II continuity, coverage and cutoff points for diagnosis, and clinical utility.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.006

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 head0.263
GPT teacher head0.520
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations235
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Personality DisordersSame topicPersonality Disorders and PsychopathologyFrench-language works237,207