MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392786920 · doi:10.1111/bdi.13410

Fostering networking opportunities and creating a community of early and mid‐career clinicians and researchers within the International Society for Bipolar Disorders

2024· article· en· W4392786920 on OpenAlexaffabout
Fabiano A. Gomes, Rebekah S. Huber, Sarah H. Sperry, Tamsyn E. Van Rheenen

Bibliographic record

VenueBipolar Disorders · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBipolar Disorder and Treatment
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBipolar disorderPsychologyPsychiatryEngineering ethicsCognitionEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD) recognizes that empowering the next generation of professionals focused on bipolar disorder is critical for both the scientific progress of the discipline but also its survival as an organization. The Early and Mid-Career Committee (EMCC) was established to provide a platform from which the ISBD could nurture and support the career development of clinicians and researchers working in this space.1 The recent EMCC-led Needs Assessment survey, which was targeted at early and mid-career (EMC) professionals, highlighted that both EMC clinicians and researchers place great importance on the development of meaningful collaborations with peers and other professionals in the field.2 Most survey respondents reported actively trying to establish collaborations within their departments and with partners in other institutions and networking during conferences and presentations. Commonly reported facilitators of successful collaborations included (i) the existence of opportunities for networking, including via social media, conferences, and committees; (ii) the availability of supportive mentors that encouraged and facilitated the establishment of collaborations and (iii) pleasurable interpersonal interactions with other professionals that cultivated a positive collaborative relationship. The future activities of the EMCC will be guided by the aforementioned priorities, which provide a tenable framework to support the needs of EMC clinicians and researchers focused on bipolar disorder. These activities will prioritize the inclusion of individuals of diverse backgrounds to foster networking in underdeveloped areas, such as in the Global South, as a means of mitigating inequality and reducing disparities in line with the guiding principles of equity, diversity, and inclusion. Although some initiatives, such as advocating for more representation and dedicated activities in scientific meetings are already in place and are part of the EMCC mission, the implementation of initiatives to address other priorities may take more time and effort. For instance, there will likely be financial barriers within the ISBD to expand travel funding for EMC members, so establishing new and creative partnerships with funding agencies and industry and offering a hybrid model that allows online participation and networking during the Annual Conference might be warranted. That said, as ISBD already promotes online activities there should be virtually no barriers to adapt the existing digital infrastructure and expertise to establish an online community connecting new and existing EMC members. The EMCC recognizes that networking and collaboration are a critical means to enable innovative solutions to difficult problems. Fostering networking and collaboration is a priority of the EMCC, and the initiatives that will be executed to address this priority will undoubtedly better position EMC professionals focused on bipolar disorder to make progress in the field. FAG received research funding from the BBRF Foundation (NARSAD Young Investigator Award/P&S Fund Investigator), the Canadian Menopausal Society/Pfizer Research Award, Queen's University Faculty of Health Science, SEAMO and Queen's University Department of Psychiatry internal grants. He received honoraria as a speaker/consultant in the past from Abbvie, Lundbeck, and Otsuka. All these funds were unrelated to the current manuscript. HSR received funding from the Brain and Behavior Research Foundation, National Institutes of Health, National Network of Depression Centers and Huntsman Foundation. SHS received funding from the Brain and Behavior Research Foundation Young, Investigator Award (Sperry), NIMH K23MH131601 (Sperry) and NIMH 1L30MH127613–01 (Sperry) grants. TEVR was supported by an Al and Val Rosenstrauss Fellowship from the Rebecca L Cooper Medical Research Foundation. Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.761
Threshold uncertainty score0.668

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.161
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBipolar DisordersSame topicBipolar Disorder and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207