Perspectives on personal identity in the early stages of psychosis: A survey of Canadian clinicians
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: Identity-related concerns represent an important aspect of young people's experience in early psychosis. Knowledge regarding clinicians' perspectives on this issue, however, is limited. Thus, the present study was developed to understand Canadian clinicians' perspectives on personal identity-related concerns in early psychosis. METHODS: An online survey was distributed to 331 multiprofessional clinicians working in early psychosis intervention programs in a Canadian province. Clinicians were asked about their opinions regarding the salience of identity in early psychosis using Likert-rated items and open response questions. RESULTS: Nearly all of the clinicians agreed that identity is an important issue for clinical attention, yet only half of the clinicians endorsed a high level of confidence in their ability to address issues related to identity in treatment. Although several clinical strategies were identified, specific evidence-based approaches for strengthening identity in early psychosis remain lacking. CONCLUSIONS: Findings indicate a need for early psychosis programs to invest in identity- related training for clinicians.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".