A Follow-up Study of Persons Found Not Criminally Responsible on Account of Mental Disorder in British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe the characteristics of individuals found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder (NCRMD) after the 1992 Criminal Code amendments and to track their movement through the forensic system, as well as to unveil the changes to British Columbia's forensic psychiatric system that resulted from Bill C-30. METHOD: Profile information relating to persons found NCRMD between February 4, 1992, and February 4, 1998, in British Columbia was collected and analyzed. Community follow-up data was collected and analyzed for a 24-month period following a subject's discharge from hospital. RESULTS: A substantially greater number of individuals entered the forensic psychiatric system in British Columbia after Bill C-30 was implemented. The post-1992 forensic psychiatric population contained fewer persons charged with serious index offences and a greater number of persons charged with relatively minor offences. The length of hospitalization for the NCRMD cohort decreased substantially after the 1992 Criminal Code amendments. CONCLUSION: The Bill C-30 provisions have made the NCRMD defence an attractive option for defendants and legal counsel.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".