Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is increasing evidence that some key symptoms, including excessive inhibition and indiscriminate sociability, previously thought to characterize attachment disorders lack validity. Aggression and other psychosocial difficulties also appear not to be an essential aspect of the disorder. This article summarizes current thinking on the clinical symptoms, available diagnostic tools and possible ways of treating attachment disorders. Purpose of review Ever greater numbers of abused and subsequently fostered children, as well as international adoptees, have led to an increasing interest in the clinical manifestations and treatment options for attachment disorder. Recent work has provided new insights into the natural course of this condition and has examined possible ways of moderating its effects on children and their families. This paper provides a brief overview of selected studies addressing the assessment and treatment of this condition. Recent findings Infants and toddlers raised in institutions and in neglectful homes have a high incidence of attachment disorders. There seems to be a linear relationship between length of stay in an institution and the rate of attachment disorder and other developmental abnormalities. However, while placement into an adequate home can ameliorate the cognitive and biological delays frequently associated with this condition, it does not seem to assure the development of selective attachments in these children. Furthermore, there are currently no empirical data that can substantiate a clinically effective treatment.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".