Book Review: Child Psychiatry: Developmental Disability and Behaviour
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lon don, On tarioCom pe tent in ter dis ci pli nary man agement of be hav iour prob lems in the field of men tal re tar da tion is se ri ously lack ing in Can ada.In this pre domi nantly British-authored text, more than one author con cludes that even in the UK, which has both ex cel lent pediatricianled child dis abil ity cen tres and ex cel lent cen tres led by child psy chia trists, such set tings rarely merge to pro vide the full spec trum of di ag nos tic as sess ment and treat ment serv ices fre quently needed to man age this popu la tion.This book could be re garded as an in troduc tory text for resi dents in psy chia try, pe di at rics, and neu rol ogy, as well as for gradu ate clini cal psy chol ogy stu dents.The ex perts in the vari ous fields have attempted (some more suc cess fully than oth ers) to "put Humpty Dumpty back together again" or, as the edi tors ex plain in their pref ace, to as sem ble "dif fer ent pieces of wood, from the same tree."Aris ing from the ma te rial gath ered at a work shop spon sored by the pub lish ers, the text suf fers some what from its mul tiple author ship: it com bines chap ters that pres ent in tro duc tory prin ci ples with chap ters that re flect cur rent re search.The ad vance ment of our knowl edge of be hav iour phe no types (at least up to and in clud ing 1996) is sum ma rized with succinct ac counts of find ings in spe cific syn dromes.These in clude An gle man, Cor nelia de Lange, Down, fragile-x, Prader-Willi, Smith-Magenis, CATCH-22, and Wil liams syn dromes,
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.041 | 0.019 |
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".