MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366965499 · doi:10.1684/ipe.2022.2436

Innovations et modifications clés des descriptions cliniques et exigences pour le diagnostic du chapitre sur les troubles mentaux, comportementaux et neurodéveloppementaux de la CIM-11 de l’OMS

2022· article· fr· W4366965499 on OpenAlexaff
Cary S. Kogan, Jean Grenier, Sabrina Paterniti, Tahilia J. Rebello, Brigitte Khoury, Anne M. Lovell, Anne‐Claire Stona, Geoffrey M. Reed

Bibliographic record

VenueL information psychiatrique · 2022
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Treatment and Access
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

En mai 2019, l'Assemblée mondiale de la santé de l'Organisation mondiale de la santé (OMS) a approuvé la Classification internationale des maladies et des problèmes de santé connexes (CIM-11) pour les statistiques de mortalité et de morbidité.La version statistique de la CIM-11 est entrée en vigueur le 1 er janvier 2022.Cet article décrit le processus de révision de la CIM-11 entrepris par l'OMS dans l'élaboration d'une version pour spécialistes de la santé mentale, due pour publication en 2022.Cet effort sans précédent a impliqué des experts, des organisations et membres du public de diverses régions du monde.Nous décrivons également les essais sur le terrain a travers l'internet et en clinique qui ont été utilisés pour vérifier la validité, l'utilité clinique, la fiabilité et l'acceptabilité au sens large de la classification avant sa publication.L'accent est mis sur les aspects du développement de la CIM-11 qui ont fait appel à des parties prenantes francophones.Enfin, le plan de formation des cliniciens et de mise en œuvre de la CIM-11 est discuté.

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)0.048
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.113
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.251

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0480.113
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0090.007
Science and technology studies0.0020.006
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.004

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.314 · 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
GenreReview

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueL information psychiatriqueSame topicMental Health Treatment and AccessFrench-language works237,207