Original Research Spirituality and Religion in Canadian Psychiatric Residency Training
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Psychiatry has traditionally distanced itself from spiritualand religious issues. Freud described religion as “a uni-versal obsessional neurosis... a regression to primary narcis-sism ” (1), a view influenced by his personal, conflicted, experiences of faith and religion (2). Early drive theories iden-tified religion as suppressing normal sexual desires and thus contributed for decades to psychoanalysts ’ view of religion as a source of guilt and dependency. Today, psychiatrists retain a general discomfort about addressing religious or spiritual is-sues in clinical work and research. The “anti-tenure ” effect of Can J Psychiatry, Vol 48, No 3, April 2003 171 Objective: Mental health professionals are increasingly aware of the need to incorporate a patient’s reli-gious and spiritual beliefs into mental health assessments and treatment plans. Recent changes in assessment and treatment guidelines in the US have resulted in corresponding curricular changes, with at least 16 US psychiatric residency programs now offering formal training in religious and spiritual issues. We present a survey of training currently available to Canadian residents in psychiatry and propose a lecture series to
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it