MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Mind – Body – Environment: George Engel's Psychoanalytic Approach to Psychosomatic Medicine

2002· article· en· W2132461698 on OpenAlexaff
Graeme J. Taylor

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychoanalytic theoryGeorge (robot)Psychosomatic medicinePsychoanalysisPsychologyPsychotherapistPhilosophyArt historyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To provide an overview of George Engel's psychoanalytic approach and contributions to psychosomatic medicine. METHODS: Engel's publications were reviewed to identify his use of psychoanalytic methods and concepts to explore and conceptualize the interrelationships among mind, body and environment in health and disease. RESULTS: Engel's contributions include an interviewing method for accessing psychological data; insights into the psychobiology of anaclitic depression; a psychosomatic theory concerning the influence of relationships and loss on susceptibility to disease; an elucidation of psychodynamic factors in the pathogenesis of chronic pain; and a longitudinal self-analytic study of anniversary reactions. CONCLUSIONS: Engel successfully bridged the disciplines of medicine, psychiatry, and psychoanalysis, and broadened the scope of psychosomatic research and clinical practice by identifying the role of interpersonal relationships throughout life in regulating mental and bodily processes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.017
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations17
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian & New Zealand Journal of PsychiatrySame topicPsychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207