MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2117529686 · doi:10.1192/pb.26.11.433

A new opportunity: three tales of training in liaison psychiatry of old age

2002· article· en· W2117529686 on OpenAlex
John Holmes, J. B. MILLARD, Susie Waddingham

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychiatric Bulletin · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMental Health and Psychiatry
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychiatryPsychiatric comorbidityCreedQuarter (Canadian coin)General hospitalMedicineLiaison psychiatryComorbidityPsychologyFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Liaison psychiatry has emerged as a sub-speciality within general adult psychiatry, with specific experience and training being required to develop the skills and knowledge to address comorbid physical and psychiatric symptoms and illness (House & Creed, 1993; Lloyd, 2001). Older people often present with significant physical and psychiatric comorbidity (Ames et al, 1994; Holmes & House, 2000) and most old age psychiatry services receive one-quarter to one-third of referrals from general hospital wards (Anderson & Philpott, 1991). Despite this, there are no specific requirements for training in liaison psychiatry for old age psychiatrists at any level. The experience gained in assessing and treating general hospital referrals during basic and higher specialist training is felt to be adequate (Royal College of Psychiatrists, 1998).

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.571
Threshold uncertainty score0.980

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.000

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.181 · 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