MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2144832325 · doi:10.1177/0306624x10376204

Maternal Neonaticide Following Traumatic Childbirth

2010· review· en· W2144832325 on OpenAlexaff
Marc Nesca, J. Thomas Dalby

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHomicide, Infanticide, and Child Abuse
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryAthabasca University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChildbirthHomicidePsychiatryMedicineMental healthPoison controlPsychologyOffspringInjury preventionPregnancyMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent work has documented the relatively high incidence of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) symptoms in women during the birth delivery process and afterwards, even in uncomplicated births. This phenomenon, however, has yet to be linked with cases of neonaticide (child homicide in the first 24 hr of life) or infanticide (child homicide within the 1st year of life). Women are more likely to experience mental disorder after childbirth than at any other time in their lives, and the intentional killing of an offspring by a mentally ill mother is likely underreported. The immediate postpartum period is a time of heightened vigilance by health providers and, when the tragic death of an infant occurs, forensic professionals should specifically assess for PTSD. As an illustration, the authors present a case of maternal neonaticide that was directly linked to PTSD without any other concomitant mental disorder. PTSD is a viable mitigating factor to be examined in legal defenses of infanticide either in isolation or in conjunction with other factors.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.361
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.073 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations11
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative CriminologySame topicHomicide, Infanticide, and Child AbuseFrench-language works237,207