Criteria for psychiatric hospitalization: A checklist approach

The decision to hospitalize a psychiatric patient is often a source of controversy. This fact is reflected in the Connecticut Mental Health Center’s program of quality assessment. The center conducts individual, retrospective chart review using a 32-page checklist of normative criteria. The primary purpose of this portion of the chart review system is to highlight those cases in which a patient may have been hospitalized unnecessarily. We present and analyze the cumulative data from 300 cases for which the criteria-for-hospitalization scale was completed. We conclude that the scale is an efficient instrument and is convenient for justifying hospitalization. We suggest minor revisions in the scale and speculate upon its as-yet-untapped research potential.     

Überwachung mittels „elektronischer Fußfessel“

For forensic expert witnesses the introduction of electronic surveillance to the German penal code system raised new questions, such as the effects on relapse prevention. This paper presents international experiences about the effects of electronic tagging, especially on relapse prevention, and lists the advantages and disadvantages of this procedure. Also the recommendations for electronic tagging concerning a sexual offender who was repeatedly convicted and released after 10 years of imprisonment are described.     

О правилах исчисления предложе ий

, .     

Evaluation of drug toxicity in clinical trials

An increasing number of drugs removed from the market because of unacceptable toxicity raises concerns regarding preapproval testing of drug safety. In the present paper it is postulated that the non-inferiority type of trial should be abandoned in favor of the superiority trial with active controls and less stringent (p<0.1, both for efficacy and toxicity) statistics. This approach will increase sensitivity of detection of drug-induced adverse effects at the expense of increasing false positive results regarding the difference in efficacy between the tested and reference drug. Such a move will increase the protection of future patients. In addition, the proposed design is far more acceptable from the clinical (e.g. no need to specify the statistically expected “unimportant” number of deaths) and ethical points of view, as well as being favored by the strong incentive of involved parties. In the second part of this paper arguments are presented in favor of the hypothesis that placebo (still used in some superiority trials) does not induce adverse effects. The assertion that placebo may induce adverse effects is probably biased by the nature of the clinical experiment. Such a conclusion is supported by studies indicating that placebo-induced adverse effects are disease — and treatment — specific. The modification of clinical trials according to the proposed changes may increase the trials’ sensitivity at detecting adverse effects of drugs. A lecture on the subject of this paper was presented at the 6th International Bioethics Conference on the subject of ‘The Responsible Conduct of Basic and Clinical Research’, held in Warsaw, Poland, 3–4 June 2005.     

On field's argument for substantivalism

In this article I subject to criticism Field's argument, according to which field theory takes space‐time to be à substance since it ascribes field properties to space‐time points. There is petitio principii error made in this reasoning because Field does not give any justification for his controversial assumption that fields are properties of space‐time points. What is more, I suggest, Field's interpretation of field theory is incompatible with the way this theory is understood and utilized by its users, namely scientists. My criticism is based on the assumption that one cannot propose an ontology of a given scientific theory, at the same time imposing on it an interpretation which clashes with the interpretation current among its users. I also suggest that in order to establish the ontology of a scientific theory one should also take into account the way it has been constructed. According to this criterion, field theory does indeed take space‐time to be a substance.     

A new formulation of discussive logic

S. Jakowski introduced the discussive prepositional calculus D ₂as a basis for a logic which could be used as underlying logic of inconsistent but nontrivial theories (see, for example, N. C. A. da Costa and L. Dubikajtis, On Jakowski's discussive logic, in Non-Classical Logic, Model Theory and Computability, A. I. Arruda, N. C. A da Costa and R. Chuaqui edts., North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1977, 37–56). D ₂has afterwards been extended to a first-order predicate calculus and to a higher-order logic (cf. the quoted paper). In this paper we present a natural version of D ₂, in the sense of Jakowski and Gentzen; as a consequence, we suggest a new formulation of the discussive predicate calculus (with equality). A semantics for the new calculus is also presented.