Psychological Support for Earthquake Victims at an Evacuation Center in Tokyo
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article describes psychological support provided by clinical psychologists (CPs), in liaison with other professionals, for the Great East Japan Earthquake victims at a secondary evacuation center located in central Tokyo. The purpose of this intervention is to prevent solitary death and suicides. Nurses and CPs had organizes a team which provided consultation about health problems, psychological and social concerns. The team worked well, because of having frequent conference and consultation. So, we exchanged and shared information and pursued solutions in cooperation. In about three months of our intervention, there were 740 visits in total and 92 out of them had complaints about mental problems. Forty of them were referred to CPs' interviews. Sleeplessness and nervousness were the most common problems among them. In such cases CPs had employed 'body and mind' approach, instructing them how to relax by breathing techniques. Fortunately, no solitary deaths and suicides have been reported so far. In conclusion, it is realized that the cooperation and mutual understanding among the professionals involved are the key to the success of this type of intervention and we should know each other and enhance the sense of cooperation through the daily clinical work.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".