Il malato di mente autore di reato nelle strutture residenziali: una ricerca in una comunita terapeutica
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Italian Government has decided that in 2013 italian forensic mental hospitals (Ospedali psichiatrici giudiziari”) shall close: offenders sentenced to a “misura di sicurezza” (detention in psychiatric care) will be restrained in facilities appointed by the National Health System, either public or accredited private ones. Since the 90s, some private psychiatric residential facilities are already treating such patients, on appointment with NHS mental health departments: the main aim of this study is to understand if and how forensic psychiatric patients hosted in one of such institutions differ from non-forensic ones. For this purpose, an analysis of the characteristics of 147 patients of a private facility, including 66 forensic patients and 81 non-forensic patients (hosted between 2005 and 2010), has been performed. Such facility (Pra’ Ellera) founded in Cairo Montenotte (Savona) over twenty year ago, currently hosts about 60 patients (now mainly forensic) and treats them via an integrated approach (both pharmacological and psychodynamic). Our findings show that, in general, forensic patients did not generally differ significantly from non-forensic ones. Their presence in the community isn’t making their problem worse, despite serious problems such as the long-stay and risk of re-internment to forensic mental hospital. In particular, forensic patients share with others the same failure rate (a quarter of them ‘can’t cope’); the average length of stay is only slightly higher than non-forensic patients; moreover, they are minor players of self-destructive acts (self-harm, attempted suicides). Unlike other guests, forensic patients significantly show a decrease in psychosis, which remains, however, the most common diagnosis in the facility. One could then say, considering the trend, that increasingly small differences may be observed in future between the categories.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.003 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".