Delphi Recommendations for Diagnosis and Treatment of Sexual Interest in Children in Non-Mandated Community Settings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study sought to reach an international expert consensus regarding the diagnosis and treatment of adults with a sexual interest in children in cases where treatment is non-mandated. An expert panel of 27 participants (19 professionals and eight individuals with sexual interest in children) completed at least one of three rounds of an online Delphi survey. In the first round, participants responded to open-ended questions about assessment approaches, treatment goals, treatment approaches, and adapting assessment and treatment for sexual exclusivity. In rounds two and three, participants rated their level of agreement with each of the recommendations derived from Round 1. Consensus was reached for 48 practice guidelines, particularly for recommendations that relate to general clinical practice, such as assessing for other mental health conditions. There was more contention for the inclusion of forensic practices. The present recommendations can serve as a set of tentative guidelines that may guide assessment and treatment of sexual interest in children in non-mandated settings.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.396 | 0.361 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.016 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".