MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3021636259 · doi:10.1177/0004867420912327

A transdiagnostic perspective of constructs underlying obsessive-compulsive and related disorders: An international Delphi consensus study

2020· article· en· W3021636259 on OpenAlexaff
Leonardo F. Fontenelle, Erin Oldenhof, Maria E. Moreira‐de‐Oliveira, Jonathan S. Abramowitz, Martin M. Antony, Daniëlle C. Cath, Adrian Carter, Darin D. Dougherty, Ygor Arzeno Ferrão, Martijn Figee, Ben J. Harrison, Marcelo Q. Hoexter, Jun Soo Kwon, Anne Katrin Kuelz, Luisa Lázaro, Christine Löchner, Donatella Marazziti, David Mataix‐Cols, Dean McKay, Eurı́pedes Constantino Miguel, Sharon Morein‐Zamir, Steffen Moritz, Gerald Nestadt, Kieron O’Connor, Stefano Pallanti, Christine Purdon, Scott L. Rauch, Peggy Richter, Jean‐Yves Rotgé, Roseli Gedanke Shavitt, Carles Soriano‐Mas, Vladan Starčević, Dan J. Stein, Gail Steketee, Eric A. Storch, Steven Taylor, Odile A. van den Heuvel, David Veale, Douglas W. Woods, Antonio Verdejo‐García, Murat Yücel

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicObsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of WaterlooSunnybrook Health Science CentreToronto Metropolitan UniversityUniversity of TorontoUniversité de Montréal
FundersInstituto de Salud Carlos IIINational Medical Research CouncilAustralian Research CouncilMedical Research CouncilNational Institutes of HealthDepartment of Industry, Innovation and Science, Australian GovernmentMonash UniversityFundação Carlos Chagas Filho de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de JaneiroConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoHealth Research Council of New ZealandInstituto D'Or de Pesquisa e EnsinoAustralian GovernmentAmerican Red CrossTexas Higher Education Coordinating BoardGreater Houston Community FoundationNational Health and Medical Research CouncilDepartment of Industry, Innovation, Science, Research and Tertiary Education, Australian GovernmentCommunities Foundation of Texas
KeywordsPsychologyResearch Domain CriteriaConstruct (python library)Delphi methodCognitionClinical psychologyPsychotherapistPsychopathologyPsychiatryComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The Research Domain Criteria seeks to bridge knowledge from neuroscience with clinical practice by promoting research into valid neurocognitive phenotypes and dimensions, irrespective of symptoms and diagnoses as currently conceptualized. While the Research Domain Criteria offers a vision of future research and practice, its 39 functional constructs need refinement to better target new phenotyping efforts. This study aimed to determine which Research Domain Criteria constructs are most relevant to understanding obsessive-compulsive and related disorders, based on a consensus between experts in the field of obsessive-compulsive and related disorders. METHODS: Based on a modified Delphi method, 46 experts were recruited from Australia, Africa, Asia, Europe and the Americas. Over three rounds, experts had the opportunity to review their opinion in light of feedback from the previous round, which included how their response compared to other experts and a summary of comments given. RESULTS: Thirty-four experts completed round one, of whom 28 (82%) completed round two and 24 (71%) completed round three. At the final round, four constructs were endorsed by ⩾75% of experts as 'primary constructs' and therefore central to understanding obsessive-compulsive and related disorders. Of these constructs, one came from the Positive Valence System (Habit), two from the Cognitive Control System (Response Selection/Inhibition and Performance Monitoring) and the final construct was an additional item suggested by experts (Compulsivity). CONCLUSION: This study identified four Research Domain Criteria constructs that, according to experts, cut across different obsessive-compulsive and related disorders. These constructs represent key areas for future investigation, and may have potential implications for clinical practice in terms of diagnostic processes and therapeutic management of obsessive-compulsive and related disorders.

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)0.195
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.140
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.195
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1950.140
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0060.007
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0030.015
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.306 · 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.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations20
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian & New Zealand Journal of PsychiatrySame topicObsessive-Compulsive Spectrum DisordersFrench-language works237,207