Offenders With Personality Disorder Who Fail to Progress: A Case-Control Study Using Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling Path Analysis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Offenders with personality disorder can be challenging to engage and retain in treatment. The UK Offender Personality Disorder (OPD) pathway aims to proactively and responsively identify and engage offenders with personality disorder. However, a subpopulation of offenders on the pathway have been found to not be accepted into any OPD service and therefore fail to progress. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to identify and describe offenders on the OPD pathway who fail to progress and to understand the causal drivers by which individuals fail to progress in the pathway. METHODS: A sample of 50 offenders on the OPD pathway who had been refused from at least two OPD services (nonprogression group) were compared to 100 offenders accepted into OPD services (control group). Partial least squares structural equation modeling was used to model the causal factors involved in not being accepted into OPD services. RESULTS: =0.25), specifically, psychopathy, psychosis, and co-occurring personality disorder. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of the study provide a basis of how to work with this population in the future to increase the likelihood of acceptance into OPD services.
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.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 it