Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neilson G, Chaimowitz G, Zuckerberg J. Informed consent to treatment in psychiatry. Can J Psychiatry. 2015;60(4 Insert 1): 1–11. Position Paper. It has come to the authors' attention that their article included errors on page 10, left column, lines 26 to 30. The text should have read: “Quebec civil law allows for a Mandate in Anticipation of Incapacity, which serves a role similar to advance directives. The curre nt Mandate in Anticipation of Incapacity is renamed the Protection Mandate in Quebec's new Code of Civil Procedure, which is expected to come into force in 2016. In parallel, in December 2015, Quebec's Act Respecting End-of-Life Care will come into force and with it a new regime for advance medical directives.” In addition, the author list should have read as follows: Neilson G, Chaimowitz G. Moreover, an Acknowledgements paragraph has been added beginning on page 11, column 1, line 31, and should read as follows: Acknowledgements The authors thank Dr. Sébastien Proulx, Dr. Géraldine Godmaire-Duhaime and Joaquin Zuckerberg for their suggestions and assistance in the preparation of this position paper. The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry regrets the error and any inconvenience it might have caused.
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 | 0.007 | 0.111 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.211 | 0.137 |
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".