Ryssia Wolfsohn's 1907 dissertation on “the heredity of dementia praecox”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the 19th century, psychiatric genetic studies typically utilized a generic category of "insanity." This began to change after 1899, with the publication of Kraepelin's 6th edition containing, among other disorders, his mature concept of dementia praecox (DP). We here review an article published by Ryssia Wolfsohn in 1907 from her dissertation at the University of Zurich entitled "Die Heredität bei Dementia praecox" (The Heredity of Dementia Praecox). This work, performed under the supervision of E. Bleuler, was to our knowledge the first formal genetic study of the then new diagnosis of DP. She investigated 550 DP probands admitted to the Burghölzli hospital with known information about their "heredity burden." For most probands, she had information on parents, siblings, grandparents, and aunts/uncles. Of these patients, only 10% had no psychiatric illness in their families. In the remaining probands, she found rates of the four major categories of psychopathology she investigated: mental illness-56%, nervous disorders-19%, peculiar personalities 12% and alcoholism 13%. Her most novel analyses compared either total familial burden or burden of her four forms of mental disorders on her DP probands divided by subtype and outcome. In neither of these analyses, did she find significant differences.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".