MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2969656299 · doi:10.1177/0706743719870509

Fréquence et Type de Délits Commis Par des Hommes Atteints de Troubles Mentaux Graves Selon l’âge D’apparition Des Comportements Antisociaux

2019· letter· fr· W2969656299 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Mélanie Lapalme, Karine Forget, Yann Le Corff, Gilles Côté

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · 2019
Typeletter
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresInstitut national de psychiatrie légale Philippe-PinelUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyPsychologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: There are important differences in frequency and type of offence committed by individuals with severe mental disorders (SMD), depending on whether their antisocial behaviors began at an early age or as adults. However, individuals having shown early antisocial behaviors do not form an homogenous group. This study's objective is to test if the antisocial behaviors earliness could explain this heterogeneity. METHOD: 137 men with SMD under 3 separate legal status were recruited. They were distributed in 3 groups according to the antisocial behaviors earliness. RESULTS: The participants in the childhood group commit more violent offences and more of them present a substance use disorder compared with those in the adult group. A more frequent alcohol use disorder separates the youth group from the adult group. There is no significant difference between the childhood and the youth group, but there are more reported offences in the childhood group. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the age of antisocial behaviors onset should be considered in evaluating risk and managing individuals with SMD.

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)0.000
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 score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.094

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.279 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry→Same topicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending→French-language works237,207→