MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7075589925

Specificity of the Social Interaction Self-Statement Test in Social Phobia

2001· article· en· W7075589925 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Commons@Trinity (Trinity University) · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicDiverse Scientific and Economic Studies
Canadian institutionsTrinity College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBeck Depression InventoryBeck Anxiety InventorySocial anxietyAnxiety disorderAnxietySocial relationPsychometricsScale (ratio)Phobic disorder
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The specificity of the Social Interaction Self-Statement Test (SISST) was evaluated in sample of 277 patients seeking treatment for anxiety. Both the positive and negative scales significantly discriminated between patients diagnosed with social phobia and other anxiety disorder patients. Patients with social phobia scored significantly higher on the negative scale and significantly lower on the positive scale as compared with other treatment-seeking anxiety disorder patients. Negative SISST scores were significantly correlated with the Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) and Beck Depression Inventory (BDI). The positive scale was significantly correlated with the BDI. Despite this relationship, differences in BAI and BDI scores did not account for SISST findings. The present study provides further support for the use of the SISST with clinical 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.165 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital Commons@Trinity (Trinity University)Same topicDiverse Scientific and Economic StudiesFrench-language works237,207