MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W596949807

Involuntary Detention and Therapeutic Jurisprudence: International Perspectives on Civil Commitment

2003· book· en· W596949807 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueDigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) · 2003
Typebook
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHealthcare Decision-Making and Restraints
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTherapeutic jurisprudenceInvoluntary treatmentJurisprudenceImmigration detentionTribunalPreventive detentionLawPsychiatryMental healthPolitical scienceCriminologyMedicinePsychologyHuman rights
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Contents: Introduction: Introduction, Kate Diesfeld and Ian Freckelton. International Approaches: A therapeutic jurisprudence model for civil commitment, Bruce J. Winick Involuntary treatment: searching for principles, Genevra Richardson The rights of involuntarily admitted psychiatric patients: European developments, Johan Legemaate. Involuntary Detention of Those with Mental Illnesses: Where is the asylum?, Suzy Stevens Decision-making by psychiatrists about involuntary detention, Ruth Vine Choosing among options for compulsory care, John Dawson All locked up with nowhere to go: treatment refusal in the involuntarily hospitalized psychiatric population in Canada, Mona Gupta. Review of Involuntary Detention Decision-Making: The release of Judge Schreber in Saxony 1902: an historic example of modern decision-making about involuntary detention, Ian Freckelton Therapeutic potential in review of involuntary detention, Stephanie du Fresne Mental heath review tribunals, Elizabeth Perkins Patients' views of the mental health review tribunal procedure in England, Nicola Ferencz Discharge of restricted patients from special hospitals in England and Wales: law and practice, Lucy Scott-Moncrieff. Legal Criteria for Involuntary Detention of Those with Mental Illnesses: Involuntary detention decision-making, criteria and hearing procedures: an opportunity for therapeutic jurisprudence in action, Ian Freckelton Capacity and confinement when is detention not detention?, Peter Bartlett Insights on 'Insight': the impact of extra-legislative factors on decisions to discharge detained patients, Kate Diesfeld Involuntary detention of persons found not guilty of murder by reason of mental impairment or found unfit to stand trial: a new jurisprudence from Victoria, Ian Freckelton. Involuntary Outpatient Detention: Coerced community treatment: international trends and outcomes, Virginia Aldige' Hiday Mandated community treatment: the potential role of violence risk assessment, John Monahan A clinical perspective on involuntary outpatient treatment: efficacy and ethics, Alexander I.F. Simpson Rights issues in compulsory community treatment, Sylvia Bell. Intellectual Disabilities and Involuntary Detention: Throwing away the key: people with intellectual disability and involuntary detention, Kelley Johnson and Sue Tait New Zealand's intellectual disability (compulsory care) legislation, Warren J. Brookbanks Criteria for discharge of people with learning disabilities: a comparative analysis, Kate Diesfeld Bibliography Index.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.251
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.241 · 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