MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2333448180 · doi:10.1177/0706743716628858

Book Review: Les troubles bipolaire

2016· article· en· W2333448180 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Raymond Tempier

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBipolar Disorder and Treatment
Canadian institutionsMontfort Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ce livre edite sous la direction de plusieurs eminents psychiatres francais rassemble un ensemble de chapitres se concentrant sur les troubles bipolaires comme son titre l’indique, en commencant d’abord par l’evolution des idees concernant les troubles bipolaires et en detaillant les classifications passees et actuelles comprenant la future CIM 11 et le DSM 5. Ensuite, viennent un ensemble de chapitres consacres a la clinique des troubles bipolaires chez l’adulte allant des descriptions de la manie aigue jusqu’a la description de la cyclothymie et des temperaments affectifs a la frontiere des troubles psychopathologiques. Les diagnostics differentiels sont abordes ainsi que les formes cliniques notamment chez l’enfant et l’adolescent. Les formes evolutives sont aussi decrites comprenant les troubles bipolaires a cycles rapides, le risque suicidaire, etc. Une revue des echelles de mesure psychopathologiques est aussi presentee. Enfin, sont abordees les comorbidites addictives et somatiques, neurologiques ou autres (TDAH, troubles de personnalite, etc.). Les derniers chapitres de ce livre sont consacres aux traitements pharmacologiques et psychotherapiques et de prise en charge sociale. Notons un chapitre interessant sur la therapie interpersonnelle et d’amenagement des rythmes sociaux, un abord de plus en plus important dans la prise en charge.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.158

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0470.029

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.251
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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry→Same topicBipolar Disorder and Treatment→French-language works237,207→