MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2321518708 · doi:10.1097/nmd.0b013e31822fc7aa

Stalking by Patients

2011· article· en· W2321518708 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicStalking, Cyberstalking, and Harassment
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStalkingHarassmentAngerFeelingResentmentPsychologyMedicineClinical psychologyPsychiatrySocial psychologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Stalking involves recurrent unwanted communication, harassment, and intrusive behaviors. The aim of this study was to examine doctors' experiences of being stalked by their patients in a Canadian urban area. A questionnaire designed to study the nature and prevalence of stalking experiences among physicians was sent to 3159 randomly chosen physicians in the Greater Toronto Area. Of the 1190 physicians who responded, 14.9% reported having been stalked. Although both male and female patients were stalkers, their motives and stalking behaviors were dissimilar. Psychiatrists, surgeons, and OB/GYNs reported the highest rates of being stalked. Both male and female physicians are at an increased risk of being stalked by patients who may feel loving feelings or anger and resentment. Varying reasons behind the stalking may account for the differing rates between specialties. Physicians may benefit from recognition of behaviors that tended to precede the onset of stalking behavior.

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.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.343
Threshold uncertainty score0.363

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.239 · 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