MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416915095 · doi:10.1080/15332985.2025.2596115

Addressing injustices toward individuals with schizophrenia-spectrum conditions: a call to action for social work practice

2025· article· en· W4416915095 on OpenAlexaff
Shannon Blajeski, Lindsay A. Bornheimer, Jessica A. Wojtalik, Lynette Studer, Shelly Ben‐David, Patricia R. Turner, Ana T. Flores, Matthew J. Smith, Nev Jones, Jordan DeVylder

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial Work in Mental Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMental Health and Patient Involvement
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial workMental healthCall to actionAction (physics)Social careSocial philosophyVulnerable adultHuman servicesSocial policy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The field of social work has a lengthy history of training social workers for community mental health settings, and an ethical commitment to advance human rights and social justice. However, individuals with schizophrenia-spectrum conditions continue to suffer from myriad social injustices, including poverty, social isolation, and lower-life expectancy. This paper outlines these injustices, and reviews historical social work contributions and current training for supporting this population. Finally, the authors outline actions to 1) adopt national practice guidelines that formally acknowledge injustices, including anti-oppressive practice guidelines that are inclusive of lived experience, and 2) revitalize social work’s contributions to models of care for schizophrenia-spectrum populations.

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)0.054
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.053
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 score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.287

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0540.053
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0210.036
Scholarly communication0.0160.021
Open science0.0050.028
Research integrity0.0240.046
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.294
GPT teacher head0.527
Teacher spread0.233 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial Work in Mental HealthSame topicMental Health and Patient InvolvementFrench-language works237,207