Obsessions of child murder: underrecognized manifestations of obsessive-compulsive disorder.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is a common illness that remains underdiagnosed and undertreated. Distressing obsessions of violence are a frequent manifestation of OCD, related to overattribution of meaning to passing thoughts, a sense of overresponsibility, and concurrent confessing rituals to decrease related anxiety. These intrusive thoughts can include infanticidal or filicidal obsessions in new parents. There is little to no evidence to suggest that these thoughts pose a significant risk of harm, which is reflected in related professional treatment guidelines. In this study, we sought to examine the recognition and risk management preferences among psychiatry professionals and trainees regarding a case example description of filicide obsessions as a manifestation of OCD. A questionnaire regarding a case marked by filicide obsessions was emailed to psychiatrists and psychiatry residents. Respondents provided their preferred and differential diagnoses, reporting their perceptions of risk and optimal case management. Of the 43 respondents, only 62 percent considered OCD in the differential diagnosis. Those considering OCD in the differential diagnosis assessed risk of harm as being lower than did those who did not consider it (3.7 versus 6.6; F(1,36) = 12.18; p < .005). Despite this result, the majority of respondents included involuntary admission (60%) and reports to child welfare authorities (68%) among their preferred management strategies. This survey supports our contention that greater awareness of OCD and understanding of management strategies is needed among psychiatrists and trainees. As well, a greater awareness of the low risk of violence associated with this population is necessary to avoid penalizing individuals with OCD-related aggressive and infanticidal obsessions.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".