MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1974781045 · doi:10.1108/17479886200800011

International Comparative ACT Study Process and Data: How ACT teams compare in Toronto, Birmingham, Nashville and Auckland

2008· article· en· W1974781045 on OpenAlexaffabout
Neil Deuchar, Katie Saunders, Jane Vanderpyl, Thomas W. Doub, Jules M. Marquart, Steve Lurie, Angela da Silva, Heather McKee, Verity Humberstone, Stuart Moyle

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Journal of Leadership in Public Services · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEvaluation and Performance Assessment
Canadian institutionsCanadian Mental Health Association
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAssertive community treatmentMental healthOutreachPublic relationsLibrary sciencePolitical scienceSociologyMedicineMental illnessLawComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When the International Initiative for Mental Health Leadership (IIMHL) was developed, one of the hopes was that the exchange visits among international sites would stimulate the development of collaborative working relationships. This article reviews one such collaborative project, the development and implementation of a comparative study of assertive community treatment teams, or assertive outreach teams as they are called in the UK and New Zealand.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.237
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
Open science0.0030.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.529
GPT teacher head0.517
Teacher spread0.012 · 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.

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

Citations5
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Journal of Leadership in Public ServicesSame topicEvaluation and Performance AssessmentFrench-language works237,207