MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2159961100 · doi:10.1177/1363461507081633

Editorial: Refugees and Forced Migration: Hardening of the Arteries in the Global Reign of Insecurity

2007· editorial· en· W2159961100 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Laurence J. Kirmayer

Bibliographic record

VenueTranscultural Psychiatry · 2007
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMigration, Health and Trauma
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsRefugeeForced migrationMental healthCriminologyHuman rightsDisplaced personPolitical scienceSociologyPsychiatryMedicineLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most of the articles in this issue of Transcultural Psychiatry stem from the 6th annual McGill Advanced Study Institute in Cultural Psychiatry on 'Refugees and forced migration: Human rights and mental health services,' which took place in Montreal, June 1-2, 2006. The conference and workshop brought together an international group of scholars from anthropology, sociology, law, public health, psychiatry and psychology to examine the mental health of asylum seekers, refugees and internally displaced peoples, as well as the impact of human trafficking. Recent years have seen profound changes in the situation of refugees. While the number of people enduring violence and displacement continues to increase, receiving countries have become less welcoming. Anxieties about security and social integration have been used to justify more restrictive migration policies and the harsh treatment of people seeking asylum (Fekete, 2005). In many places, this has resulted in a decrease in the numbers of people applying for refugee status and in people seeking asylum within countries of safe haven. The decrease in numbers could be taken as an indication of less need but, in fact, it largely reflects the impact of policies of deterrence and exclusion. Language: en

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.091
Threshold uncertainty score0.977

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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

Citations33
Published2007
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTranscultural PsychiatrySame topicMigration, Health and TraumaFrench-language works237,207