MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415168134 · doi:10.1177/08295735251383014

Book Review: <i>Clinical reasoning and decision-making process: Child and adolescent assessment and intervention</i> by Andrews, J. J. W., &amp; Saklosfske, D. H. (Eds.) AndrewsJ. J. W.SaklosfskeD. H. (Eds.). Clinical reasoning and decision-making process: Child and adolescent assessment and intervention. Academic Press, Elsevier. 502 pp. $150. Paperback ISBN: 9780443135521. eBook ISBN: 9780443135538

2025· article· en· W4415168134 on OpenAlexaff
Shannon L. Stewart, Aadhiya S. Vasudeva

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of School Psychology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEducational and Psychological Assessments
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClinical judgmentVerbal reasoningSchool psychologyAdolescent development

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.183

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0550.039

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.441
Teacher spread0.413 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of School PsychologySame topicEducational and Psychological AssessmentsFrench-language works237,207