MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Contextualizing Specificity: Specific and Non-Specific Effects of Treatment

2007· article· en· W2139955903 on OpenAlex
Amir Raz, Robert Michels

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

VenueAmerican Journal of Clinical Hypnosis · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicPain Management and Placebo Effect
Canadian institutionsJewish General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeuroimagingPsychologyMeaning (existential)MetaphorNeural activityInterpretation (philosophy)Matching (statistics)PsychotherapistCognitive scienceNeuroscienceCognitive psychologyMedicineComputer sciencePhilosophyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Modern medicine thrives on the ideal of specific diseases, and specificity has revolutionized thinking in clinical practice (e.g., psychiatry) as well as biomedical research (e.g., neuroscience). Different notions of specificity exist (e.g., clinical, biological, and behavioral). Behavioral specificity takes on new meaning in light of recent neuroimaging and genetic findings. Drawing on the metaphor of pharmacological specificity, we provide converging data suggesting that, at least for certain individuals, specific behavioral interventions can influence focal brain activations. Interpretation of these data paves the road to a more scientific strategy for studying the neural basis of suggestion and placebo response, and holds promise for the optimal matching of patient and treatment.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.905
Threshold uncertainty score0.753

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.299 · 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