MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2760232682 · doi:10.1002/pmh.1398

Estimating the prevalence of borderline personality disorder in mothers involved in youth protection services

2017· article· en· W2760232682 on OpenAlexafffund
Lise Laporte, Joel Paris, Phyllis Zelkowitz

Bibliographic record

VenuePersonality and Mental Health · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPersonality Disorders and Psychopathology
Canadian institutionsJewish General HospitalCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-MontréalMcGill University Health Centre
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsBorderline personality disorderContext (archaeology)PsychiatryPsychologyMental healthMental illnessClinical psychologyPersonalitySubstance abuseMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Characteristics of borderline personality disorder (BPD) can undermine maternal capacity and in some cases lead to involvement with youth protection services (YPS). Yet, few studies exist on the prevalence of maternal BPD in this context and on the comparison of these families with families with other maternal psychiatric disorders or families with no mental illness within YPS. The current study surveyed 291 caseworkers working with mothers whose children and adolescents are followed by YPS. After reported prevalence was adjusted with validation procedures, the prevalence of maternal BPD in a sample of 1875 mothers was 34.3%. Comparison of three groups of families suggest that some risk factors, including substance abuse and severe conjugal conflicts, were more frequent in mothers with BPD than in mothers with other psychiatric illness or none. Furthermore, results revealed that 48.9% of mothers with BPD had a history of being followed by YPS in their childhood. Finally, children of mothers with BPD were placed at a younger age than the other children and were less often reported for conduct disorder. These results call for more attention to these highly vulnerable parents and children in both research and in adult and child mental health services. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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 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)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score0.972

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations30
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePersonality and Mental HealthSame topicPersonality Disorders and PsychopathologyFrench-language works237,207