MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401919772 · doi:10.1192/j.eurpsy.2024.107

The “Hector” case and the community rehabilitation of offenders with Intellectual Disability and psychiatric disorders

2024· article· en· W4401919772 on OpenAlexaff
Jacopo Santambrogio, Emma Francia, Antonino Giancontieri, Massimo Clerici, A. Santarone

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Psychiatry · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychiatric care and mental health services
Canadian institutionsHealth Care Foundation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychiatryRehabilitationIntellectual disabilityPsychologyMedicineNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Hector, 44 years, with mild Intellectual Disability and impulse control disorder, committed serious sexual offences against two children of his partner. Considered “socially dangerous”, he was put in prison, then with a deferment of the enforcement of the prison sentence in the forms of home detention he was hospitalized in a psychiatric facility due to his depressive condition. Upon entering the Community, he presented a deflected mood as a reaction to the discomfort from the custodial experience, which was not cognitively integrated. Both psychotropic and rehabilitation treatments started. He has been involved in a gardening activity, too. After a first period of high degree of denial of the facts and a defensive mode marked by stolidity and fatuity, revealing his poor cognitive resources, during the psychiatric sessions he became even more conscious of his crime and the suffering of the victims. Services/pathways available for offenders with ID and psychiatric disorders will be presented. Disclosure of Interest None Declared

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean PsychiatrySame topicPsychiatric care and mental health servicesFrench-language works237,207