MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401920513 · doi:10.1192/j.eurpsy.2024.745

Psychiatry on fire: Climate change and the role of mental healthcare

2024· article· en· W4401920513 on OpenAlexaff
F. Poukhovski-Sheremetyev

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Psychiatry · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate Change and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthcareMental health careMental healthPsychologyPsychiatryClimate changeHealth carePolitical scienceGeologyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction What is the psychiatrist’s role on a burning planet? As our world faces the existential ramifications of irreversible climate change, clinicians are contending with what purpose a normalizing institution like psychiatry can have in increasingly abnormal times. Objectives This presentation investigates the role of the modern mental health clinician by examining psychiatry’s current impotence in the face of climate crisis. It will be shown that current approaches are often complicit in psychiatry’s historical depoliticization of mental health and subsequent individualization of social concerns. It will be argued that the only way psychiatry can maintain its ethical obligations to its patients is by taking a courageous sociopolitical stance. Methods Emerging from a multidisciplinary literature review on the relationship between psychiatry and social crises, this work examines our field’s response to climate change in particular. A focus is made on literature that explores psychiatry’s political obligations, current trends in climate psychiatry, and proposed social psychiatric approaches to the climate crisis. Results It is shown that while ecological collapse tangibly affects our patients, psychiatry often fails to engage socio-politically with the crisis’ root causes. Framing intense reactions to climate change as trauma responses and developing neo-diagnoses such as “ecoanxiety” both risk individualizing inherently social experiences. However, Psychiatrists are also uniquely positioned to speak with authority about social crises and to articulate what a more comprehensive medical response to climate change might look like. Conclusions Given climate change’s disproportionate effects on disenfranchised populations, it is increasingly clear that health is inextricable from social circumstances. As a result, political inaction is incompatible with our ethical duty to serve patients’ health, both in the clinic and beyond it. 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.012
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0040.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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 topicClimate Change and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207