Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1984, the late United States Hawaiian Senator and highly decorated World War II veteran, Daniel Inouye, urged psychologists from the Hawaiian Psychological Association to consider lobbying for legislation that would give licensed clinical psychologists, with specialized training, the authority to prescribe psychotropic medications.The rationale for Senator Inouye's plea was the rapidly-growing numbers of Hawaiians who had inadequate access to comprehensive, integrative mental health care.The plea from Senator Inouye marked the first time that the concept of prescribing psychologists was ever discussed in a public arena.Then, in 1992, the United States military undertook a 5-year long experiment to train military psychologists to become prescribers around the globe.In 1996, the American Psychological Association approved the development of a curriculum in Clinical Psychopharmacology so that civilian, as well as military, psychologists could train to become prescribing psychologists.In 1998, Guam became the first United States entity to pass Prescriptive Authority legislation.Quickly following that success, New Mexico, in 2002, became the first state to pass this legislation with Louisiana passing its legislation in 2004.It would be another 10 years before the third state, Illinois, would pass its prescriptive authority legislation in 2014.Then, in quick succession, Iowa (2016) and Idaho (2017) successfully passed their Prescriptive Authority legislation.Today, approximately 10 additional U.S. states are actively pursuing Prescriptive Authority legislation.Beyond the United States, however, the psychologists' legislative passage of Prescriptive Authority has become an important priority.Renowned psychologists from 5 different countries on three different continents (Brazil, Canada, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and Norway) will be talking, today, about the burgeoning Movement for Prescriptive Authority in their countries.Like in the States, this Movement includes a push for legislative activity; organized efforts to train prescribing psychologists in Clinical Psychopharmacology; and vigorous efforts to garner grassroots support.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
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.
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".