A Canadian Community-University Research Alliance: Focus on Poverty and Social Inclusion for Psychiatric Consumer-Survivors
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
This commentary serves as a snapshot of a study midway through data collection and outlines some preliminary results. The purpose of the study is to better understand inter-relationships between poverty and social inclusion for psychiatric survivors. The study is allied with the Community–University Research Alliance (CURA), a Canadian government research grant program administered by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC). Participants were stratified based on housing type (housed vs. homeless) and employment status (employed and/or a student vs. unemployed). The sample includes 380 individuals (190 men and 190 women), with a psychiatric diagnosis and/or addiction issue for a minimum of one year. The four-year longitudinal study combines both quantitative (individual structured interview) and qualitative (focus group) data collection methods and preliminary quantitative analysis of the first-year data is underway. Upon its completion, it is hoped that the CURA study will yield results useful for informing policy and practice influencing health and life outcomes for psychiatric survivors and help determine the most effective use of resources to promote social inclusion.
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 | 0.010 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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