MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4243173679 · doi:10.22215/etd/2014-11488

Excited Delirium Syndrome (ExDS): Understanding the Issues and Reducing the Risks Associated with Police Use of Force

2014· dissertation· en· W4243173679 on OpenAlexaff
Simon Baldwin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRestraint-Related Deaths
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)Meaning (existential)OfficerDeliriumPsychologyLaw enforcementPsychiatryCriminologyMedicineMedical emergencySocial psychologyPsychotherapistPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The review of sudden and unexpected in-custody deaths (I-CDs) clearly demonstrates that there is a cluster of features which indicate that a subject is suffering from a medical emergency. For those who most frequently deal with these subjects (e.g., law enforcement, paramedics, emergency physicians, medical examiners) this is a real issue with serious implications. The labelling of this cluster of features as Excited Delirium Syndrome (ExDS) continues to be contentious. However a standardized and concise label with which meaning (e.g., medical emergency) can be assigned is necessary for the recognition, identification, intervention and treatment of these subjects.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.658
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.077
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRestraint-Related DeathsFrench-language works237,207