MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1553320693 · doi:10.1080/19359705.2012.653254

Advocating for Marriage and LGBT Mental Health Through Op-Eds

2012· article· en· W1553320693 on OpenAlex
Mary E. Barber

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Gay & Lesbian Mental Health · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsColumbia College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLesbianTransgenderMental healthHomosexualityPsychologyGender studiesSociologyPolitical sciencePsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes a project undertaken by the Group for Advancement of Psychiatry (GAP) Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) Committee, that of writing opinion pieces (op-eds) advocating for marriage for gay and lesbian couples and other issues related to LGBT mental health. GAP and the GAP LGBT Committee are described. The paper details the rationale for professionals taking on an advocacy project and the struggles and lessons gleaned from the project. Among other things, members of the LGBT Committee learned how to use existing position statements from their profession as well as scientific studies to assert their professional voices in opinion pieces.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.207
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.074
GPT teacher head0.461
Teacher spread0.387 · 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