MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2313223015 · doi:10.3357/asem.3363.2012

Major Depression and Fitness to Fly by Different Aviation Authorities

2012· article· en· W2313223015 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alpo Vuorio, Tanja Laukkala, Pooshan Navathe

Bibliographic record

VenueAviation Space and Environmental Medicine · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpaceflight effects on biology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAviationDepression (economics)AntidepressantAeronauticsAviation medicinePsychologyMedicinePsychiatryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Safety issues are paramount in aviation and careful treatment protocols have been developed to ensure fitness to fly among aviators recovering from major depressive episodes (MDE). Aeromedical examiners (AMEs) do not necessarily treat depressive patients frequently, so they often consult psychiatrists; however, psychiatrists are rarely familiar with aviator treatment protocols. U.S., Canadian, and Australian regulations allow several choices among antidepressant drugs for flying pilots recovering from an MDE. Symptom stability times before the possible return to flying duties vary from 4 wk to 12 mo. So far European regulations have not allowed antidepressants, but the situation may change.

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)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.243
Threshold uncertainty score0.529

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations13
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAviation Space and Environmental MedicineSame topicSpaceflight effects on biologyFrench-language works237,207