MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156871699

Toward an integrative understanding of social phobia.

2001· article· en· W2156871699 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel Li, Pratap Chokka, Philip G. Tibbo

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyNeuroscienceSerotonergicNeuroimagingAmygdalaDopaminergicSocial anxietyEndophenotypeAnxiety disorderNeurogeneticsAnxietyClinical psychologyPsychiatryDopamineCognitionBiologyGeneticsSerotonin
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Our objective was to examine the neurobiology of social phobia from the perspectives of basic sciences, genetics, immunology, neuroendocrinology, neurotransmission and neuroimaging and to provide an integrated understanding of social phobia in the framework of a hypothetical neural circuit. Family and twin studies provide evidence that social phobia is heritable with significant genetic influence, and molecular genetics offers possibilities in understanding the nature of the trait that is transmitted. The biologic distinctiveness of social phobia from anxiety disorders and physiological validation of differences between generalized and discrete social phobia subtypes have been implicated in genetic, naturalistic and chemical challenge studies. Evidence of specific dysfunction of dopaminergic, serotonergic, noradrenergic and GABAergic (gamma-aminobutyric acid) neurotransmitter systems has been presented in animal models, challenge studies and treatment investigations. Preliminary neuroimaging research supports previous studies suggesting striatal dopaminergic dysfunction in social phobia and suggests the importance of functional circuits. A neural circuit involving the striatum, thalamus, amygdala and cortical structures may provide a framework for integrating much of the current knowledge on the neurobiology of social phobia.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.822
Threshold uncertainty score0.864

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.162
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations35
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesFrench-language works237,207