Bibliographic record
Abstract
OCD (Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder), as one of the top 10 most disabling conditions according to the World Health Organization, not only causes a psychological burden but also often occurs with other disorders. It can influence both individuals and society as a whole. It leads to challenges in mental health, interpersonal relationships, the economy, and public health systems. Because of the varied causes of OCD, including biological, environmental, and psychological factors, symptoms of OCD have varied sub-types. Even though there are advancements in treatments, OCD still has significant personal and societal impacts. It not only affects the mental health and well-being of individuals but also contributes to high healthcare costs and loss of productivity. This global problem should attract widespread attention from society. The paper, through a literature review, explores the causes, symptoms, influences, and treatment of OCD. The paper finds that OCD is a deeply challenging disorder with wide-ranging influences on individuals and society. Even though progress in understanding and treating OCD has been made, future research is still necessary to identify the cause of OCD and create even more robust treatments.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".