Bibliographic record
Abstract
Once a week I consult to a child and youth mental health team working in North Surrey. This is a Vancouver suburb where many children grow up in abject poverty, often with single parents who struggle with poor accommodation, poorly paid jobs, unemployment, substance abuse and unrewarding relationships. “Grow-ops” and other types of crime abound, and the pervasive threat of violence on the streets and in schools frightens many youngsters. This book piqued my curiosity. Would it expand my knowledge? Give me some tools to work with these children and teens? Could I recommend it to the therapists working with them and their families? The book served to remind me that, as Dan Offord and his group found in the Ontario Health Study, poverty is the major causative factor for many adolescent disorders. It reaffirmed that our assessment and treatment approaches must include attention to the social determinants of health, and liaison with other resources in the community. The author, a clinical psychologist, specializes in problems of adolescence, family violence, family development and women’s issues. The strengths of the book lie in her perceptive depictions of abused and suicidal adolescents and their families, discussion of adolescent development, in-depth portrayal of various types of family violence, and vignettes describing her therapy with individuals and families. There were deficiencies including a lack of attention to biological variables, and very little about the role of violence in the community. Although the vignette about the delinquent adolescent centres on a youth with learning and attention problems, the author believes that “At the root of most serious problems of adolescence lies severe family dysfunction, particularly child abuse and neglect.” Despite the omissions, this book is well-written and interesting and would make a good introduction for mental heath professionals who have little experience of working with adolescents and family violence.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".