The examination of Kraepelin's diagnoses of dementia praecox and <scp>manic‐depressive</scp> insanity in pedigrees: Studies of Schuppius in 1912 and Wittermann in 1913
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the first two decades of the 20th century, a new approach to psychiatric genetics research emerged in Germany from three roots: (i) the wide-spread acceptance of Kraepelin's diagnostic system, (ii) increasing interest in pedigree research, and (iii) excitement about Mendelian models. We review two relevant papers, reporting analyses of, respectively, 62 and 81 pedigrees: S. Schuppius in 1912 and E. Wittermann in 1913. While most prior asylum based studies only reported a patient's "hereditary burden," they examined diagnoses of individual relatives at a particular place in a pedigree. Both authors focused on the segregation of dementia praecox (DP) and manic-depressive insanity (MDI). Schuppius reported that the two disorders frequently co-occurred in his pedigrees while Wittermann found them to be largely independent. Schuppius was skeptical of the feasibility of evaluating Mendelian models in humans. Wittermann, by contrast, with advice from Wilhelm Weinberg, applied algebraic models with proband correction to DP in his sibships with results consistent with autosomal recessive transmission. While he had less data, Wittermann suggested that MDI was likely an autosomal dominant disorder. Both authors were interested in other disorders or traits appearing in pedigrees dense with DP (e.g., idiocy) or MDI (e.g., highly excitable individuals).
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".