MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Health Status of Incarcerated Adolescents: Implications for Juvenile Justice Decision Making

2004· article· en· W2129760488 on OpenAlexaff
Robert A. Morris

Bibliographic record

VenueJuvenile and Family Court Journal · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicChild and Adolescent Health
Canadian institutionsChild, Adolescent and Family Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomic JusticePovertyClearingJuvenileRehabilitationJuvenile delinquencyPsychologyHealth careNursingMedicineCriminologyPolitical scienceBusinessLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Adolescents arriving in detention often bring with them significant medical, dental, and psychological problems. These issues have important implications for courts that must decide the best disposition for offending youths. Appropriate treatment benefits the individual by enhancing his/her well‐being and improving his/her chances of successful rehabilitation. Society also benefits by avoiding the higher cost of caring for neglected conditions later in life. A comprehensive health care program for detention facilities involves establishing standardized procedures that address both common adolescent problems plus those more peculiar to detainees. Health care professionals working in a correctional setting have unique duties such as clearing youths for boot camp, monitoring injuries, dealing with resistant patients, monitoring for safe activities, and planning aftercare for youths who may face impediments to accessing care such as poor motivation and poverty. Research concerning issues specific to the needs of incarcerated youths remains infrequent and should be undertaken by health care providers. This article provides an overview of medical issues confronting juvenile offenders that should be considered when a juvenile becomes involved in the juvenile justice system.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.634
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.360 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJuvenile and Family Court JournalSame topicChild and Adolescent HealthFrench-language works237,207