MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2111638222 · doi:10.1177/070674370505001408

Unavailable Essential Archival Data: A Major Limitation in the Conduct of Clinical Practice and Research in Violence Risk Assessment

2005· article· en· W2111638222 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Richard Padgett, Christopher D. Webster, Michael Robb

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversitySt. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDocumentationRisk assessmentPsychologyClinical PracticeHuman factors and ergonomicsSuicide preventionPoison controlPsychiatryMedicineFamily medicineMedical emergencyComputer scienceComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Numerous studies have identified various historical factors strongly associated with violent behaviour in psychiatric patients. We comment herein on some practical reasons for difficulty in obtaining the background documentation necessary for risk assessment.

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)0.308
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.625
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Reproducibility · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.692
Threshold uncertainty score0.854

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.3080.625
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0200.028
Science and technology studies0.0080.007
Scholarly communication0.0100.010
Open science0.0080.009
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.003

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 head0.190
GPT teacher head0.496
Teacher spread0.306 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
DomainReproducibility
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

Citations4
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry→Same topicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending→French-language works237,207→