Borderline Pathology of Childhood: Implications of Early Axis II Diagnoses.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: A personality pathology framework may be useful in the diagnosis and treatment of children with chronic psychopathology and impairment in many domains of functioning. This paper presents the utility of such an approach through a description of research investigating borderline pathology of childhood (BPC). METHODS: Literature regarding the phenomenology, risk factors, and outcomes of BPC and similar disorders is reviewed. RESULTS: Research conducted at the SMBD-Jewish General Hospital in Montreal has shown that children with BPC can be reliably identified via chart review, and that they exhibit a pattern of risk factors similar to that of adults with borderline personality disorder, such as psychological trauma and deficits in executive function. Preliminary results of a follow-up study in adolescence suggests that these children remain more functionally impaired than a comparison group. Our current research investigates neuropsychological deficits and their relationship to trauma in children with BPC. We are also exploring whether a similar pattern can be observed in their parents. CONCLUSION: We conclude that BPC symptom patterns may diagnostically define a group of high risk children and may eventually guide our approach to early intervention.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".