MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1979622465 · doi:10.1007/s11136-014-0796-3

Patient and public engagement in health-related quality of life and patient-reported outcomes research: what is important and why should we care? Findings from the first ISOQOL patient engagement symposium

2014· article· en· W1979622465 on OpenAlexaff
Kirstie Haywood, Jo Brett, Sam Salek, Nancy Marlett, Colin Penman, Svetlana Shklarov, Colleen M. Norris, Maria Santana, Sophie Staniszewska

Bibliographic record

VenueQuality of Life Research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMental Health and Patient Involvement
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuality of Life ResearchThematic analysisPublic healthQuality of life (healthcare)Public engagementDiversity (politics)Medical educationQuality (philosophy)Health careHealth services researchPsychologyMedicineQualitative researchPublic relationsNursingPolitical scienceSociologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.176
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.141
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.176
Threshold uncertainty score0.929

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1760.141
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0050.005
Scholarly communication0.0110.009
Open science0.0010.014
Research integrity0.0040.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.638
GPT teacher head0.534
Teacher spread0.103 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations78
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueQuality of Life ResearchSame topicMental Health and Patient InvolvementFrench-language works237,207