MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1855311363 · doi:10.1177/104973150001000507

Teaching Evidence-Based Practice in Mental Health

2000· article· en· W1855311363 on OpenAlexaff
Dan Bilsker, Elliot M. Goldner

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch on Social Work Practice · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Sciences Research and Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScrutinyMental healthEvidence-based practiceCritical appraisalPsychologySocial workMedical educationPsychiatryPsychotherapistPedagogyMedicineAlternative medicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article is reprinted from the journal Evidence-Based Mental Health. It presents the core virtues of the evidence-based paradigm (questioning of unfounded beliefs, rigorous scrutiny of methodology, critical appraisal of proposed treatments), and the authors’ experiences in teaching evidence-based practice to psychiatric residents. The aim of such training is to produce informed consumers of evidence, not researchers or methodologists. The lessons learned in psychiatric training have obvious applications to social work education.

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)0.063
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.121
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.332

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0630.121
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.010
Scholarly communication0.0080.008
Open science0.0020.010
Research integrity0.0060.016
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.003

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 head0.492
GPT teacher head0.685
Teacher spread0.194 · 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
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

Citations40
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch on Social Work PracticeSame topicHealth Sciences Research and EducationFrench-language works237,207