MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2423946361 · doi:10.9778/cmajo.20150135

Patterns of skin disease in a sample of the federal prison population: a retrospective chart review

2016· article· en· W2423946361 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Geneviève Gavigan, A McEvoy, Jim Walker

Bibliographic record

VenueCMAJ Open · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRosaceaAcneMedicinePsoriasisObservational studyMedical diagnosisPopulationFamily medicinePrisonRetrospective cohort studyDemographyDermatologyPsychiatryPathologyPsychologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Dermatology in vulnerable populations is under-researched. Our objective was to analyze the most commonly referred skin diseases affecting the Correctional Service Canada inmates in Ontario. METHODS: An observational, cross-sectional, retrospective chart review of inmate patients seen from 2008 until 2013 was performed. Two groups of patients were included in the analysis: those assessed in-person, and those evaluated by e-consult. RESULTS: In the in-person patient group, the 3 most common diagnoses were acne, psoriasis and other superficial mycoses. For the e-consult group, the 3 most frequent diagnoses were acne, psoriasis and rosacea. There was a clear bias toward more inmates being seen in-person where the service was provided (Collins Bay Institution) than from other correctional institutions in Eastern Ontario. INTERPRETATION: Most of the skin diseases that affected the incarcerated population studied were common afflictions, similar to those affecting the general population, which is in agreement with other studies. Future studies investigating skin diseases in male and female inmates across Canada would bestow more generalizable data.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.163
Threshold uncertainty score0.324

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 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

Citations8
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCMAJ OpenSame topicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual OffendingFrench-language works237,207