MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Part II: Development of the Construct Within the North American Psychiatric Taxonomy

2006· article· en· W2138477215 on OpenAlexaff
Gerri Lasiuk, Kathleen Hegadoren

Bibliographic record

VenuePerspectives In Psychiatric Care · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPosttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPosttraumatic stressConstruct (python library)PsychologyInterpersonal communicationSexual abuseClinical psychologyPsychiatryPsychotherapistHuman factors and ergonomicsMedicinePoison controlSocial psychologyMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

TOPIC: The impairment associated with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) carries with it staggering costs to the individual, to the family, and to society as a whole. Although there is strong evidence that gender plays a significant role in responses to stress and trauma, gender specificity is still not well incorporated into clinical or research work in the area of PTSD. PURPOSE: This is the second of three articles examining the sufficiency of the current PTSD construct to articulate the full spectrum of human responses to trauma. This article chronicles ongoing refinements to the original PTSD criteria and the subsequent controversies. SOURCE OF INFORMATION: Existing bodies of theoretical and research literature related to the effects of trauma. CONCLUSION: In a third article we will review evidence supporting the existence of a more complex posttraumatic stress reaction associated with interpersonal trauma (physical/sexual abuse/assault).

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
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
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.287 · 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

Citations21
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePerspectives In Psychiatric CareSame topicPosttraumatic Stress Disorder ResearchFrench-language works237,207