Electroconvulsive therapy in young people and the pioneering spirit of Lauretta Bender
Bibliographic record
Abstract
From antiquity up to the middle of the 20th century, with few exceptions, childhood psychiatric disorders were at best ignored and at worst considered manifestations of ‘badness’ or poor upbringing. Thus, it is not surprising that the treatments administered were generally of little clinical benefit or, applying today's standards, more akin to punishment than treatment. In this context, the initial use of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) in young people in the 1940s provided a welcome breakthrough. ECT was first used in children and adolescents early in that decade by Heuyer and colleagues in Paris, with positive results (1), but what remains the largest published cohort of young recipients of the treatment was that reported by Lauretta Bender in 1947 (2). In that year, Bender described the use of ECT at New York's Bellevue Hospital in 98 children younger than 12 years of age and, while acknowledging that complete remission occurred in only a few patients, Bender suggested that ECT was of benefit in all but two or three of the young recipients. Bender considered the children as having ‘childhood schizophrenia’. However, using contemporary criteria, they would more likely qualify for a diagnosis of developmental disorder or disruptive behaviour disorder.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".