MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4230494357 · doi:10.1176/ps.62.5.pss6205_0455

This Month's Highlights

2011· article· en· W4230494357 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychiatric Services · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

I In nt te er rn na at ti io on na al l V Va ar ri ia at ti io on n i in n A AD DH HD D T Tr re ea at tm me en nt ts s Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) has received wide international recognition as a chronic neurodevelopmental disorder leading to high levels of impairment.Cross-national variation in ADHD prevalence is now thought to be attributable to methodological differences in case finding rather than to cultural or national-level factors.However, as this month's lead article documents, treatment procedures for ADHD vary widely both across and within nations, and economic, historical, and political forces and cultural values play key roles.Stephen P. Hinshaw, Ph.D., and coauthors summarize data from a survey that addressed ADHD treatment policies and procedures in nine nations: Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Germany, Israel, the Netherlands, Norway, and the United Kingdom.Representatives of these countries met in Berkeley, California, in March 2010 to discuss the survey findings and to develop ways to provide optimal services in light of the wide variation in policies and practices (page 459).C Co oe er rc ci io on n i in n P Ps sy yc ch hi ia at tr ri ic c T Tr re ea at tm me en nt t

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score0.353

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0070.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1060.047

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychiatric ServicesSame topicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderFrench-language works237,207