MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2130344368 · doi:10.1002/jaba.247

Interactions between behavior function and psychotropic medication

2015· review· en· W2130344368 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Behavior Analysis · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBehavioral and Psychological Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychotropic medicationPsychologyFunctional analysisFunction (biology)Behavior changePsychiatryClinical psychologySocial psychologyMental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We reanalyzed published studies that reported functional analyses conducted in the presence and absence of medication. In Analysis 1, we assessed the overall effect of psychotropic medication on problem behavior. Medication had a reductive effect in 29 of the 37 sets of functional analyses reviewed. The magnitude of the effect was associated with the baseline level of responding according to a rate-dependency function. Analysis 2 examined medication-induced changes in behavior function. The introduction of medication was followed by the emergence of a new function (1), a change in functions (1), the subtraction of one function in multiply controlled problem behavior (2), and near-zero levels of responding (6). Thus, in 4 of 37 cases reviewed, medication may have induced function-specific changes in problem behavior. We discuss the implications of these findings for a closer collaboration between behavior analysts and prescribing professionals in the treatment of problem behavior.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.329
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.131 · 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