MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2791771952 · doi:10.1111/jir.12472

Persistence of self‐injury, aggression and property destruction in children and adults with tuberous sclerosis complex

2018· article· en· W2791771952 on OpenAlexaff
Lucy Wilde, Kelly A. Wade, Kate Eden, Joanna Moss, Petrus J. de Vries, Chris Oliver

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Intellectual Disability Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTuberous Sclerosis Complex Research
Canadian institutionsChild, Adolescent and Family Mental Health
FundersCerebraTuberous Sclerosis Association
KeywordsPersistence (discontinuity)AggressionImpulsivityTuberous sclerosisPsychologySelf-destructive behaviorIntervention (counseling)Clinical psychologyDevelopmental psychologyInjury preventionPoison controlMedicinePsychiatryMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Individuals with tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC) are at increased risk of developing self-injurious behaviour. The persistence of this deleterious behaviour over years is reported in aetiologically heterogeneous samples to be between 60% and 80% but is unknown for TSC. METHOD: In this study, we determined the 3-year persistence of self-injury in a sample (n = 52) of children (with and without ID) and adults (with ID) with TSC and examined characteristics associated with persistence. RESULTS: Findings for self-injury were contrasted to those for aggression and property destruction to examine the specificity of results to this behaviour. Self-injury was persistent in 84.6% of those with TSC who showed this behaviour, in contrast to 66.7% both for aggression and destruction. Persistent self-injury was associated with poor self-help skills, greater overactivity/impulsivity and more behavioural indicators of pain. These latter two characteristics were also associated with persistent aggression. No characteristics were associated with persistence of property destruction. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that self-injurious behaviours in individuals with TSC, together with aggressive and destructive behaviours, are highly persistent and would benefit from targeted intervention. Poor adaptive skills, overactivity/impulsivity and painful health conditions may differentiate those at most risk for persistent self-injury or aggression.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.111
GPT teacher head0.349
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 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

Citations16
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Intellectual Disability ResearchSame topicTuberous Sclerosis Complex ResearchFrench-language works237,207