MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W18175096 · doi:10.1071/he09058

Using mass media to teach the warning signs of stroke: the long and the short of it

2009· article· en· W18175096 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Corinne Hodgson, Patrice Lindsay, Frank Rubini

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Promotion Journal of Australia · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPatient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Stroke Network
KeywordsStroke (engine)MedicineWarning signsPublic healthAdvertisingMedical emergencyMass mediaEmergency medicineNursingBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Stroke is a major cause of morbidity and mortality and rapid treatment is critical to patient outcomes. This paper looks at the effect of paid television advertising campaigns upon the general public's knowledge of the warning signs of stroke and emergency department (ED) stroke presentations. METHODS: Data for the study includes results of nine random-digit dialing telephone surveys conducted among Ontario adults aged 45 and over. The mean number of ED presentations for all strokes and for transient ischemic attacks (TIA) were obtained from the Registry of the Canadian Stroke Network (RCSN). RESULTS: Polls indicated that long advertising campaigns were associated with significant increases in the public's knowledge of stroke warning signs, while shorter campaigns were associated with much smaller increases. Time (as represented by month) was the single most important factor determining the mean number of ED presentations for total stroke but was not for TIAs. Campaign status (on or off the air) had a strong and significant effect on ED presentations when the advertising campaigns were long; when the advertising campaigns were shortened, there was no campaign effect. CONCLUSIONS: Long, intermittent campaigns are effective in increasing the public's awareness of the warning signs of stroke and may have a significant effect on ED presentations for stroke and TIA. Public awareness of stroke warning signs declines during advertising black-outs, so short campaigns are less effective.

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)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.470
GPT teacher head0.513
Teacher spread0.043 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations22
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Promotion Journal of AustraliaSame topicPatient-Provider Communication in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207