MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1972891939 · doi:10.1136/ip.2010.029215.935

SMARTRISK's theory of change for prevention of injury among Canadian youth

2010· article· en· W1972891939 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Philip R. Groff, Sally M. Marshall, A. B. Baker

Bibliographic record

VenueInjury Prevention · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Policy Implementation Science
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOutcome (game theory)Intervention (counseling)Process (computing)Theory of changeTheory of planned behaviorPsychologyEngineeringApplied psychologyComputer scienceControl (management)ManagementEconomicsPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The model employed by SMARTRISK to develop the Theory of Change for Youth was adapted from one proposed by the Aspen Institute Roundtable on Social Change. It is recognised as a best practice in the art of theory construction. The process begins with identifying the end goal an organisation wishes to achieve, the ultimate intended outcome(s) of any strategies. Next, a process of backwards mapping is undertaken whereby any preconditions (intermediate and shorter term outcomes) to arrive at the final goal are noted. Throughout this process, each outcome is assessed to determine whether it will necessarily lead to the next outcome in the model, or whether a planned intervention by the organisation is necessary. In addition, any underlying assumptions about objectives or the links between them are made explicit. The authors will be presenting the Theory of Change for Prevention of Injury among Canadian Youth, and illustrating specific application of the Theory of Change with evaluated examples of SMARTRISK's injury prevention programming for youth.

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 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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.461
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.504
GPT teacher head0.617
Teacher spread0.112 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInjury PreventionSame topicHealth Policy Implementation ScienceFrench-language works237,207