Screening for mental disorders in police custody settings
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
SUMMARY Mental disorders are overrepresented in the criminal justice system, and this applies equally to police custody. These environments are complex and often pressured, and the acuity of the situation, combined with underlying mental disorders, comorbid medical problems and substance misuse, can lead to behavioural disturbance and increased psychiatric risk. Police custody may also present an opportunity to identify and signpost people with mental disorders and vulnerabilities who are ordinarily hard to reach by standard health services. This article considers the purposes of mental health screening of detainees in police custody. It gives an overview of research into screening for a range of psychiatric disorders and vulnerabilities (including substance misuse and traumatic brain injury) and summarises data on deaths in and immediately following release from custody. Given the inadequacy of statutory screening procedures in some jurisdictions, the authors offer a pragmatic evidence-based protocol to guide screening for mental disorders in custody detainees.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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