MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4395465807 · doi:10.1002/cbm.2336

Screening and identification of fetal alcohol spectrum disorder in criminal legal settings: A realist review

2024· review· en· W4395465807 on OpenAlexafffund
Emma Jewell, Bianka Dunleavy, Martina Faitakis, Jessica W. Pun, Sarah Moss, Jacqueline Pei, Mansfield Mela, Katherine Flannigan, Mélissa Tremblay, Kaitlyn McLachlan

Bibliographic record

VenueCriminal Behaviour and Mental Health · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPrenatal Substance Exposure Effects
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Guelph
FundersLaw Foundation of British ColumbiaCanada Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder Research Network
KeywordsFetal Alcohol Spectrum DisorderContext (archaeology)PsychologyGrey literatureCoding (social sciences)Prenatal alcohol exposureFetal alcoholMEDLINEPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Screening for fetal alcohol spectrum disorder (FASD) has been identified as a promising approach to improve recognition, understanding and effective response to the unique needs of those with FASD in criminal legal settings. However, to date, there has been limited synthesis of relevant screening tools, indicators, or implementation considerations in this context. AIMS: The present review aimed to synthesise evidence and develop a conceptual framework for understanding how, when, why, for whom and by whom FASD screening tools, items and/or indicators and characteristics serve to accurately identify people with FASD in criminal legal contexts, with consideration of individual and system needs relevant to effective implementation and response. METHODS: A preregistered search was conducted using a modified realist review framework for both peer-reviewed articles and grey literature. Included sources were available in English, which focused on individuals with prenatal alcohol exposure and/or FASD with criminal legal involvement and offered new empirical evidence. Sources were reviewed using the Quality Control Tool for Screening Titles and Abstracts by Second Reviewer framework, extracted using a structured coding form and narratively synthesised. RESULTS: The search yielded 52 sources, 11 FASD screening tools designed for or applied in criminal legal settings and 38 potential FASD indicators or characteristics relevant to identifying people who may have FASD in criminal legal settings, organised into six conceptually related domains. There was limited evidence supporting the psychometric properties of screening tools across populations or settings, though growing evidence highlights the promise of some instruments. Although few studies characterised potential considerations to be made when implementing a screening tool or approach, both system and individual level needs related to recognising and effectively responding to FASD in criminal legal contexts were identified, and findings revealed strong support among legal and clinical professionals regarding the need for FASD screening in these settings. CONCLUSIONS: Findings of this review can be used to inform the development, selection, implementation and evaluation of FASD screening tools in criminal legal settings and underscore a continued need for enhanced resources, policy and cross-sectoral response to better support the needs of people with FASD in the criminal legal contexts.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.615
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.343 · 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.

Study designSystematic review
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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCriminal Behaviour and Mental HealthSame topicPrenatal Substance Exposure EffectsFrench-language works237,207