MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2282454671 · doi:10.1590/0102-311x00171014

Factors associated with recidivism among adolescents girls in conflict with the law in an institution in Brasília, Federal District, Brazil

2015· article· en· W2282454671 on OpenAlexafffund
Andréa Donatti Gallassi, Samantha Lima dos Santos, Vagner dos Santos, Eduardo Yoshio Nakano, Benedikt Fischer, Ana Lúcia Galinkin, Gabriela Arantes Wagner

Bibliographic record

VenueCadernos de Saúde Pública · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchPublic Health Agency of Canada
KeywordsRecidivismResidencePsychological interventionPsychologyDemographicsDemographyPsychiatryEnvironmental healthMedicineSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recidivism is a challenge for the Brazilian socio-educational system because it is associated with personal, social and environmental factors, especially among juvenile offenders. This study examined key characteristics and potential association with recidivism in 391 female adolescent offenders from a correctional institution in Brasília, Federal District, Brazil, between 2004 and 2011. Cross-sectional data on socio-demographics, drug use and offense characteristics from institutional information were examined. Associate factors with recidivism were examined using negative binomial regression analyses. 32.5% of offenders were recidivists at present admission and the mean frequency of recidivism among recidivists was 2.16. About half (53.6%) of the sample reported drug use. After the adjustment, recidivism was positively associated with: age; offender's drug use; residence status; offense type; and no family drug use. Factors associated with juvenile offenders' recidivism confirm findings from elsewhere, and should inform targeted interventions in Brazil.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.708
Threshold uncertainty score0.911

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCadernos de Saúde PúblicaSame topicCriminal Justice and Corrections AnalysisFrench-language works237,207