MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2167740532 · doi:10.1037/prj0000053

Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness: Reframing inequities experienced by people with severe mental illness.

2014· article· en· W2167740532 on OpenAlexaff
Rob Whitley, Benjamin F. Henwood

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychiatric Rehabilitation Journal · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMental Health and Patient Involvement
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityDouglas Mental Health University Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitive reframingHappinessLife expectancyMental illnessDignityDeclaration of independencePsychological interventionMental healthPsychologyPolitical scienceSociologyMedicinePsychiatryLawSocial psychologyPoliticsEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

TOPIC: In the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson stated that citizens of the new republic had fundamental and inalienable rights to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." PURPOSE: The purpose of this article is to reframe inequities experienced by people living with severe mental illnesses in terms of violations of Jeffersonian rights to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." We simultaneously consider governmental and clinical efforts to address identified inequities and uphold these rights. SOURCES USED: The broad research literature on severe mental illnesses was examined. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: People with severe mental illnesses experience numerous inequities regarding "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." These inequities include diminished life expectancy, excessive involuntary commitment and elevated rates of unemployment and homelessness. Governmental and clinical responses to such inequities include the Affordable Care Act and the Olmstead Decision, as well as recovery-oriented interventions such as Supported Employment and Supported Housing.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.522
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.305 · 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.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations7
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychiatric Rehabilitation JournalSame topicMental Health and Patient InvolvementFrench-language works237,207