MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2117528443 · doi:10.1016/j.jomh.2008.03.016

Men, depression and masculinities: A review and recommendations

2008· review· en· W2117528443 on OpenAlexaff
John L. Oliffe, Melanie Phillips

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Men s Health · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Roles and Identity Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsDepression (economics)Mental healthMasculinityPsychologyPsychiatryMedicinePsychoanalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fewer men than women are diagnosed with depression, although commentaries about men's depression suggest that the lower reported rates may be due to the widespread use of generic diagnostic criteria that are not sensitive to depression in men, as well as men's reluctance to express concerns about their mental health or access professional health care services. This article provides an overview of the connections between depression and masculinities and, based on that literature, recommendations are made for how we might better understand, identify and treat men's depression in gender-sensitive ways.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.129
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.328 · 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

Citations260
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Men s HealthSame topicGender Roles and Identity StudiesFrench-language works237,207