MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1598724283

Reflections of a Rural Practitioner

2010· article· en· W1598724283 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Judi L. Malone

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Counselling and Psychotherapy · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Workforce Issues
Canadian institutionsAthabasca University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObjectivity (philosophy)ConfidentialityEngineering ethicsSociologyEthical standardsPsychologyPublic relationsNursingMedical educationMedicinePolitical scienceLawEpistemologyEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Some ethical dilemmas are more prevalent or more complicated to resolve in rural practice. In this practice note, I share some of the reflections that have helped me to unpack some of the ethical complications of overlapping relationships and objectivity, community pressure and integrity, generalist practice and competency, interdisciplinary collaboration and confidentiality, and professional development and support in rural professional practice.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.038
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.073

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.038
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0150.014
Scholarly communication0.0060.007
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0150.038
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.405 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations2
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Counselling and PsychotherapySame topicGlobal Health Workforce IssuesFrench-language works237,207