MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1205405038

"I can't imagine my life without it!" Curling and health promotion: a photovoice study.

2011· article· en· W1205405038 on OpenAlexaffabout
Beverly Leipert, Robyn Plunkett, Donna Meagher‐Stewart, Lynn Scruby, Heather Mair, Kevin B. Wamsley

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDelphi Technique in Research
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurlingPhotovoiceRural areaHealth promotionMental healthPsychologyGerontologyMedicinePublic healthNursingEconomic growthPsychiatry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The sport of curling is an important activity in rural Canada, with many female participants. The health of women in rural Canada is much compromised compared to that of their urban counterparts, yet little research has explored ways to promote the health of rural women. This study examined the influence of curling on the health of women in rural Canada. A sample of 15 women and girls aged 12 to 72 from 2 communities in southwestern Ontario took pictures, kept logbooks, and participated in 2 group sessions to discuss the influence of curling on their health. The findings reveal that curling facilitates social connections, enhances physical and mental health, and provides a valued and visible way to support rural life. Clearly, curling promotes the health and community life of rural women in significant ways. More support for curling in rural settings is needed, and additional research on the topic of curling and the health of rural women is indicated.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.169
Threshold uncertainty score0.337

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.374
GPT teacher head0.449
Teacher spread0.075 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations28
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicDelphi Technique in ResearchFrench-language works237,207