Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is a neurodevelopmental disorder that presents in approximately 5% of children and 2.5% of adults. It is characterised by a range of behaviours that represent the extreme and problematic ends of the spectrums of inattention and/or hyperactivity/impulsivity across life contexts. The disorder generally presents during childhood and is highly heritable. A variety of genetic/biological liabilities are associated with ADHD. The interaction between these liabilities and suboptimal environmental experiences further increases the likelihood of problematic ADHD symptoms occurring. Especially when untreated, those with ADHD face a disproportionately high risk of calamitous life outcomes. One such potential trajectory is juvenile and/or adult criminal offending. Those with ADHD have been found to be five times more prevalent in juvenile detention settings and ten times more prevalent in adult prisons than they are in the general population. Despite this, ADHD is rarely given serious consideration when it comes to youth and criminal justice policy development and review. We contend that this is a colossal oversight. This oversight is, at least in part, likely due to the ill-informed controversy about the nature of ADHD and its treatment. In this article, we attempt to demystify some of these controversies. We also explain why those with ADHD are overrepresented in youth and criminal justice offender populations. Finally, we put forward ideas aimed at optimally addressing this overrepresentation and its impact on society.
{"title":"‘Often Fails to Give Close Attention to Detail’: Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) in Criminal Justice Offender Populations","authors":"Corey J Lane, Mark David Chong, Geoff Kewley","doi":"10.53300/001c.122030","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53300/001c.122030","url":null,"abstract":"Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is a neurodevelopmental disorder that presents in approximately 5% of children and 2.5% of adults. It is characterised by a range of behaviours that represent the extreme and problematic ends of the spectrums of inattention and/or hyperactivity/impulsivity across life contexts. The disorder generally presents during childhood and is highly heritable. A variety of genetic/biological liabilities are associated with ADHD. The interaction between these liabilities and suboptimal environmental experiences further increases the likelihood of problematic ADHD symptoms occurring. Especially when untreated, those with ADHD face a disproportionately high risk of calamitous life outcomes. One such potential trajectory is juvenile and/or adult criminal offending. Those with ADHD have been found to be five times more prevalent in juvenile detention settings and ten times more prevalent in adult prisons than they are in the general population. Despite this, ADHD is rarely given serious consideration when it comes to youth and criminal justice policy development and review. We contend that this is a colossal oversight. This oversight is, at least in part, likely due to the ill-informed controversy about the nature of ADHD and its treatment. In this article, we attempt to demystify some of these controversies. We also explain why those with ADHD are overrepresented in youth and criminal justice offender populations. Finally, we put forward ideas aimed at optimally addressing this overrepresentation and its impact on society.","PeriodicalId":33279,"journal":{"name":"Bond Law Review","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141925961","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This expert commentary examines the links between Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and the criminal justice system from a practitioner’s unique perspective. Having served as a senior police officer where my interest in these subjects grew, to now being the managing director of the United Kingdom’s largest specialist ADHD clinic, this examination turns the current debate on its head. Shifting from ‘more needs to be done’ through to ‘this is how we can do more’, the commentary concludes that we know what is wrong; we can identify the people we need to help; and hence, we need to rise up and break the systemic cycle of failure for people with ADHD and keep them in the health system rather than allowing them to fall into the criminal justice system. This analysis is based on academic research, real world-evidence and clinical experience.
{"title":"A Practitioner’s Perspective Concerning the Links between Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and the Criminal Justice System","authors":"Phillip Anderton","doi":"10.53300/001c.122032","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53300/001c.122032","url":null,"abstract":"This expert commentary examines the links between Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and the criminal justice system from a practitioner’s unique perspective. Having served as a senior police officer where my interest in these subjects grew, to now being the managing director of the United Kingdom’s largest specialist ADHD clinic, this examination turns the current debate on its head. Shifting from ‘more needs to be done’ through to ‘this is how we can do more’, the commentary concludes that we know what is wrong; we can identify the people we need to help; and hence, we need to rise up and break the systemic cycle of failure for people with ADHD and keep them in the health system rather than allowing them to fall into the criminal justice system. This analysis is based on academic research, real world-evidence and clinical experience.","PeriodicalId":33279,"journal":{"name":"Bond Law Review","volume":"16 17","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141927780","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Individuals with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) are highly overrepresented in criminal offender populations. Those with ADHD present with problematic and excessive levels of inattention, and/or hyperactivity and impulsivity. It is generally accepted that self-control difficulty is a core vulnerability for those with ADHD. A lack of appropriate self-control has long been recognised across disciplines to be an important influencing factor on the commission of crime. Historically, the occurrence of pervasively low-self-control within an individual has been seen to be principally influenced by social and environmental factors. Up-to-date research and understanding, however, shows that variability in self-control is heavily biologically/genetically derived. This article offers an integrated medical paediatric, psychological, and criminological perspective on ADHD and its impact on criminal justice outcomes. We argue that crime prevention and/or ADHD symptom management strategies that have been ignorant of this understanding are inadequate and may have unintentionally worked to the detriment of those with ADHD. We propose that a more comprehensive and applied understanding as to the origins of pervasive self-control difficulties in policy and practice is necessary to reduce the overrepresentation of those with ADHD in criminal and youth justice offender populations.
{"title":"Understanding the Nature of ADHD and the Vulnerability of Those with the Condition Who Fall Foul of the Criminal Justice System","authors":"Geoff Kewley, Corey J Lane, Mark David Chong","doi":"10.53300/001c.122031","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53300/001c.122031","url":null,"abstract":"Individuals with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) are highly overrepresented in criminal offender populations. Those with ADHD present with problematic and excessive levels of inattention, and/or hyperactivity and impulsivity. It is generally accepted that self-control difficulty is a core vulnerability for those with ADHD. A lack of appropriate self-control has long been recognised across disciplines to be an important influencing factor on the commission of crime. Historically, the occurrence of pervasively low-self-control within an individual has been seen to be principally influenced by social and environmental factors. Up-to-date research and understanding, however, shows that variability in self-control is heavily biologically/genetically derived. This article offers an integrated medical paediatric, psychological, and criminological perspective on ADHD and its impact on criminal justice outcomes. We argue that crime prevention and/or ADHD symptom management strategies that have been ignorant of this understanding are inadequate and may have unintentionally worked to the detriment of those with ADHD. We propose that a more comprehensive and applied understanding as to the origins of pervasive self-control difficulties in policy and practice is necessary to reduce the overrepresentation of those with ADHD in criminal and youth justice offender populations.","PeriodicalId":33279,"journal":{"name":"Bond Law Review","volume":"47 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141929491","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Corporate purpose has again become a topic of discussion in company law and corporate governance. In the European Union, the tension between the societal approach to companies with its long history and the efficiency-based approach with its much shorter history (and weaker basis) is palpable in the heated debates ever since the European Commission launched its Sustainable Corporate Governance initiative in 2020. In this debate, shareholder primacy proponents have sought to frame the discussion within what we call a shareholder v stakeholder dichotomy. The dichotomy is misleading and dangerous in the way it takes company law proper out of the discussion and reinforces the shareholder primacy drive. We reject the dichotomy as a meaningful framing of the debate and seek to dismantle some of the strawmen set up on the road towards sustainable corporate governance. We instead discuss corporate purpose as a matter of company law and relevant to ensuring the contribution of business to sustainability, and how such an overarching purpose could be operationalised with a redefinition of duties of the board. With this backdrop, we analyse the Sustainable Corporate Governance initiative, concentrating on company law and sustainability aspects of the proposed Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive.
{"title":"Corporate Purpose and the Misleading Shareholder vs Stakeholder Dichotomy","authors":"Beate Sjåfjell, Jukka Mähönen","doi":"10.53300/001c.94050","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53300/001c.94050","url":null,"abstract":"Corporate purpose has again become a topic of discussion in company law and corporate governance. In the European Union, the tension between the societal approach to companies with its long history and the efficiency-based approach with its much shorter history (and weaker basis) is palpable in the heated debates ever since the European Commission launched its Sustainable Corporate Governance initiative in 2020. In this debate, shareholder primacy proponents have sought to frame the discussion within what we call a shareholder v stakeholder dichotomy. The dichotomy is misleading and dangerous in the way it takes company law proper out of the discussion and reinforces the shareholder primacy drive. We reject the dichotomy as a meaningful framing of the debate and seek to dismantle some of the strawmen set up on the road towards sustainable corporate governance. We instead discuss corporate purpose as a matter of company law and relevant to ensuring the contribution of business to sustainability, and how such an overarching purpose could be operationalised with a redefinition of duties of the board. With this backdrop, we analyse the Sustainable Corporate Governance initiative, concentrating on company law and sustainability aspects of the proposed Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive.","PeriodicalId":33279,"journal":{"name":"Bond Law Review","volume":"10 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140241853","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The rise of automated decision-making in government poses both benefits and challenges. This article identifies and examines legal considerations relevant to governments and businesses in automating existing decision-making processes, focussing on planning permits and building approvals as a case study. It examines issues of transparency, algorithmic bias, privacy, data and intellectual property rights, as well as the implications of the use of generative Artificial Intelligence (AI). It also considers legal issues including whether decisions can be automated and if so, whether they are susceptible to judicial and administrative review; legal liability for damage caused by the use of AI in government decision-making; and the admissibility of AI-generated information. It is argued that although the use of AI provides significant benefits in terms of speed, efficiency and quality of decision-making, attention to the considerations of transparency, responsibility, privacy, liability and admissibility is required to minimise the risks of utilising AI systems.
{"title":"Legal Considerations in Machine-Assisted Decision-Making: Planning and Building as a Case Study","authors":"Yee-Fui Ng, E. Windholz, James Moutsias","doi":"10.53300/001c.87776","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53300/001c.87776","url":null,"abstract":"The rise of automated decision-making in government poses both benefits and challenges. This article identifies and examines legal considerations relevant to governments and businesses in automating existing decision-making processes, focussing on planning permits and building approvals as a case study. It examines issues of transparency, algorithmic bias, privacy, data and intellectual property rights, as well as the implications of the use of generative Artificial Intelligence (AI). It also considers legal issues including whether decisions can be automated and if so, whether they are susceptible to judicial and administrative review; legal liability for damage caused by the use of AI in government decision-making; and the admissibility of AI-generated information. It is argued that although the use of AI provides significant benefits in terms of speed, efficiency and quality of decision-making, attention to the considerations of transparency, responsibility, privacy, liability and admissibility is required to minimise the risks of utilising AI systems.","PeriodicalId":33279,"journal":{"name":"Bond Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44229496","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In 2019, Ms Natasha Thomson won an application for a disability support pension (DSP) under the Social Security Act 1991 (Cth) before the Australian Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT). Ms Thomson was taken to the AAT by the Department of Social Security when it appealed a decision of the AAT’s Social Services and Child Support Division. Ms Thomson is the only applicant with chronic pelvic pain and likely endometriosis that has succeeded in her claim for a DSP before the Tribunal since 2005. Endometriosis is an inflammatory condition characterised by endometrial-like tissue growing outside the uterus, which can result in pain and adhesions. It commonly grows on the pelvic organs and peritoneum but has been found in other parts of the body, such as the lungs, diaphragm, kidney and navel. There is no cure at present. Long-term management is required using medical and/or surgical treatment, both of which focus on alleviating symptoms. In this article, I consider the AAT’s determinations and set out what applicants, their legal representatives and their treating doctors can learn from the cases on applicants for a DSP with endometriosis and chronic pelvic pain.
{"title":"‘Fully Diagnosed, Fully Stabilised and Fully Treated’: Succeeding in a Claim for a Disability Support Pension in Australia for Endometriosis and Chronic Pelvic Pain","authors":"Karena Viglianti","doi":"10.53300/001c.81310","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53300/001c.81310","url":null,"abstract":"In 2019, Ms Natasha Thomson won an application for a disability support pension (DSP) under the Social Security Act 1991 (Cth) before the Australian Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT). Ms Thomson was taken to the AAT by the Department of Social Security when it appealed a decision of the AAT’s Social Services and Child Support Division. Ms Thomson is the only applicant with chronic pelvic pain and likely endometriosis that has succeeded in her claim for a DSP before the Tribunal since 2005. Endometriosis is an inflammatory condition characterised by endometrial-like tissue growing outside the uterus, which can result in pain and adhesions. It commonly grows on the pelvic organs and peritoneum but has been found in other parts of the body, such as the lungs, diaphragm, kidney and navel. There is no cure at present. Long-term management is required using medical and/or surgical treatment, both of which focus on alleviating symptoms. In this article, I consider the AAT’s determinations and set out what applicants, their legal representatives and their treating doctors can learn from the cases on applicants for a DSP with endometriosis and chronic pelvic pain.","PeriodicalId":33279,"journal":{"name":"Bond Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46887452","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The authors and Professor Denis SK Ong were colleagues at the Bond University Law School. Given their different areas of interest they did not collaborate on intellectual and academic matters. It is, however, to the regret of the current authors that they never discussed the subject of this contribution, namely the relationship between mediation, and other forms of dispute resolution (DR), on one hand and equity and its principles, on the other. This is regrettable as Denis’s scholarship and erudition on the topic would have led to a fruitful discussion. This article is written in honour of Professor Ong and his innumerable achievements in many fields of academic life.
作者和Denis SK Ong教授是邦德大学法学院的同事。考虑到他们感兴趣的领域不同，他们在智力和学术问题上没有合作。然而，令现任作者遗憾的是，他们从未讨论过这一贡献的主题，即调解和其他形式的争端解决与公平及其原则之间的关系。这是令人遗憾的，因为丹尼斯在这个话题上的学术和渊博知识本可以引发富有成果的讨论。这篇文章是为了纪念王教授和他在学术生活的许多领域取得的无数成就而写的。
{"title":"Equity and Mediation: Affinities and Disjunctures","authors":"L. Boulle, R. Field","doi":"10.53300/001c.75218","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53300/001c.75218","url":null,"abstract":"The authors and Professor Denis SK Ong were colleagues at the Bond University Law School. Given their different areas of interest they did not collaborate on intellectual and academic matters. It is, however, to the regret of the current authors that they never discussed the subject of this contribution, namely the relationship between mediation, and other forms of dispute resolution (DR), on one hand and equity and its principles, on the other. This is regrettable as Denis’s scholarship and erudition on the topic would have led to a fruitful discussion. This article is written in honour of Professor Ong and his innumerable achievements in many fields of academic life.","PeriodicalId":33279,"journal":{"name":"Bond Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49056741","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
It is undeniable that the late Denis Ong’s remarkable scholarly output has placed him among the foremost academic authorities in the field of equity and trusts in Australia. With a plethora of books and academic journal articles to his name, few scholars have produced as vast a store of analysis of a large swathe of private law jurisprudence, stretching over more than four decades. This article seeks to outline the remarkable quality of this body of work.
{"title":"The Purest Positivist of Them All? Denis Ong’s Equity Jurisprudence","authors":"Brendan Edgeworth","doi":"10.53300/001c.74190","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53300/001c.74190","url":null,"abstract":"It is undeniable that the late Denis Ong’s remarkable scholarly output has placed him among the foremost academic authorities in the field of equity and trusts in Australia. With a plethora of books and academic journal articles to his name, few scholars have produced as vast a store of analysis of a large swathe of private law jurisprudence, stretching over more than four decades. This article seeks to outline the remarkable quality of this body of work.","PeriodicalId":33279,"journal":{"name":"Bond Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48646788","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The use of arbitration in family law effectively commenced with the promulgation in April 2016 of Family Law Rules to facilitate arbitration. This article accesses all available data of the Federal Circuit Court (as it then was) regarding the use of arbitration for the three years from April 2016 to 2019. The data discussed paints a picture of the birth of family arbitration in Australia and charts trends in the use and facilitation of arbitration over this important, formative period.
{"title":"Family Arbitration in Australia: A difficult birth","authors":"Joseph Harman","doi":"10.53300/001c.73768","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53300/001c.73768","url":null,"abstract":"The use of arbitration in family law effectively commenced with the promulgation in April 2016 of Family Law Rules to facilitate arbitration. This article accesses all available data of the Federal Circuit Court (as it then was) regarding the use of arbitration for the three years from April 2016 to 2019. The data discussed paints a picture of the birth of family arbitration in Australia and charts trends in the use and facilitation of arbitration over this important, formative period.","PeriodicalId":33279,"journal":{"name":"Bond Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43555002","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The Australian government has emphasised social cohesion in addressing contemporary challenges. Arguing the legal protection of human rights could support social cohesion, this article examines the most recent federal human rights initiative – the Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011 (Cth). While the Act’s effectiveness has recently been assessed, assessments relied on analysis of Statements of Compatibility produced before 2016. The article addresses this gap. Analysing 46 statements from the final six months of 2019 against criteria derived from the scrutiny regime, it argues statement quality was generally poor, supporting existing conclusions the Act is relatively ineffective. It argues reform is required, suggesting a National Human Rights Act should be re-examined. This could both protect human rights in Australia and support social cohesion in a challenging global environment.
{"title":"Governing in Troubled Times: Exploring Australia’s Commitment to Human Rights Through Statements of Compatibility under the Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011 (Cth)","authors":"Nicholas Bulbeck","doi":"10.53300/001c.73062","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53300/001c.73062","url":null,"abstract":"The Australian government has emphasised social cohesion in addressing contemporary challenges. Arguing the legal protection of human rights could support social cohesion, this article examines the most recent federal human rights initiative – the Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011 (Cth). While the Act’s effectiveness has recently been assessed, assessments relied on analysis of Statements of Compatibility produced before 2016. The article addresses this gap. Analysing 46 statements from the final six months of 2019 against criteria derived from the scrutiny regime, it argues statement quality was generally poor, supporting existing conclusions the Act is relatively ineffective. It argues reform is required, suggesting a National Human Rights Act should be re-examined. This could both protect human rights in Australia and support social cohesion in a challenging global environment.","PeriodicalId":33279,"journal":{"name":"Bond Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46485321","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：