MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164749201 · doi:10.1177/0957154x06073012

Hysteria and catatonia as motor disorders in historical context

2006· article· en· W2164749201 on OpenAlex
Edward Shorter

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueHistory of Psychiatry · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicElectroconvulsive Therapy Studies
Canadian institutionsCanada Research ChairsUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsHysteriaCatatoniaPsychogenic diseaseConversion disorderContext (archaeology)PsychologyPresentation (obstetrics)PsychiatryMedicineSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)HistorySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is difficult to imagine motor symptoms in psychiatry as different as hysteria and catatonia. The mechanism of hysteria is presumed to be psychogenic, while catatonia has always been considered to be among the most organic syndromes in psychiatry. Yet hysteria and catatonia have historically been regarded as allied conditions, an observation borne out by recent developments in neuroscience as well as by a growing awareness that the presentation of both conditions has changed over the years. In hysteria, the main shift has been from motor symptoms to sensory complaints such as chronic fatigue; in catatonia, the major change has been the virtual disappearance of negativistic or oppositional behaviour. It is possible that catatonia as well as hysteria may be responsive to changing cultural norms.

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)0.000
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 score0.313
Threshold uncertainty score0.550

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.217 · 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