The World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP) guidelines for the treatment of adolescent sexual offenders with paraphilic disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The primary aim of these guidelines was to evaluate the role of pharmacological agents in the treatment of adolescents with paraphilic disorders who are also sexual offenders or at-risk of sexual offending. Psychotherapeutic and psychosocial treatments were also reviewed. Adolescents with paraphilic disorders specifically present a different therapeutic challenge as compared to adults. In part, the challenge relates to adolescents being in various stages of puberty and development, which may limit the use of certain pharmacological agents due to their potential side effects. In addition, most of the published treatment programmes have used cognitive behavioural interventions, family therapies and psychoeducational interventions. Psychological treatment is predicated in adolescents on the notion that sexually deviant behaviour can be controlled by the offender, and that more adaptive behaviours can be learned. The main purposes of these guidelines are to improve the quality of care and to aid physicians in their clinical decisions. These guidelines brought together different expert views and involved an extensive literature research. Each treatment recommendation was evaluated and discussed with respect to the strength of evidence for efficacy, safety, tolerability and feasibility. An algorithm is proposed for the treatment of paraphilic disorders in adolescent sexual offenders or those who are at risk.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".