MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2410952075 · doi:10.1093/pch/7.6.379

A library in my practice, why not?

2002· article· en· W2410952075 sur OpenAlexaff
Diane Sacks

Notice bibliographique

RevuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2002
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueLibrary Science and Information Literacy
Établissements canadiensNorth York General Hospital
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineWorld Wide WebData scienceComputer science

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Paediatricians, who spend much of their time with young people, understand that a child's imagination is a rich resource. Opening a book is one of the easiest ways to release a wealth of imagination. All it took was a book box and a sign in my office to teach the children and their parents in my practice about the importance of reading. I always had books in the waiting room to keep kids entertained, but shortly after starting my practice I noticed that the children would ask to borrow the books. When they would bring them back, they often brought one of their old books that they had ‘outgrown’. Soon the children could not wait to come back to borrow a book and bring one of their own for exchange. I have a long history with books. One of my earliest memories is of when I was three years old, watching my quiet, reserved father arguing with the librarian. He was upset that children couldn't get a library card until they were registered in school. He won that argument, and I won the gift of an endless supply of books from the library. We went weekly, or even more often if I could persuade my parents. First my parents read to me, then I read to myself, then we shared books and we read together. When they got older and their eyes failed, I often read to them. I can still picture my dad in his last years with Alzheimer's disease carrying around a book. Books were one of the most important things we shared as a family, so it was only natural that I would encourage parents in my practice to introduce books to their children and to enjoy reading together. I often ask my patients what they are reading. When a three-or four-year-old looks at me oddly in response to that question, I explain that I mean what book are they reading with their parents. Sometimes I ask them whether they have a library card and, if so, to show it to me the next time they come to the office. I encourage trips to the library with parents all the time. I love to explain the joys of the library to new immigrants to Canada, especially those from developing countries. My practice has always had a lot of teen moms. Recently, one asked about starting an exchange library in the drop-in centre in her neighbourhood. She asked whether she could put up a sign in my office requesting book donations because the children in her neighbourhood may not have books at home. She said that many teen moms are used to using drop-in centres but not the library and, perhaps, if we started with something convenient for them, they would start using the library regularly. Within weeks, she had lots of books. Someone even donated a bookshelf! Opening a library book exchange in your practice is such an easy thing to do. The concept is simple: the kids borrow a book from the office, and when they return it, they also bring in one of their own. The shelves are never empty. There is a big sign that reads, “Take one, read then pass it on”. The kids love to see whether someone else has taken the book that they brought in. Paediatricians can play a key role in reminding parents about the importance of reading with their children, and starting a book exchange is a great way to do it. Photograph courtesy of Health Canada Photograph courtesy of Health Canada

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,016
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,111
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Commentaire · Signal consensuel: Commentaire
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,034
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,113

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0160,111
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0030,003
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0130,014
Communication savante0,0230,032
Science ouverte0,0020,010
Intégrité de la recherche0,0160,019
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0340,019

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,020
Tête enseignante GPT0,290
Écart entre enseignants0,270 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreCommentaire

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2002
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentnon

Explorer davantage

Même revuePaediatrics & Child HealthMême sujetLibrary Science and Information LiteracyTravaux en français237 207