Raising public awareness of aphasia in southern Ontario, Canada: A survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Despite the relatively high prevalence of aphasia, research indicates that, world-wide, public awareness of aphasia is lacking. Of the surveys that have been conducted internationally, none has studied the Canadian public's awareness of aphasia. The purpose of the present survey was to assess public awareness and basic knowledge of aphasia of individuals in southern Ontario, Canada. METHOD: Using the same questionnaire that has been used in other countries, face-to-face surveys were conducted in public places (e.g. parks) at various locations in southern Ontario. Respondents were asked questions pertaining to their awareness and knowledge of aphasia. The number of surveys retained for analysis was 831. In addition to an evaluation of public awareness and knowledge of aphasia, the potential influences of age, gender, and occupation were analysed. For those who had heard of aphasia, questions were asked to determine how or where they had heard of aphasia. RESULT: Consistent with the literature, overall public awareness and basic knowledge of aphasia in southern Ontario was found to be limited. The factors of age, gender and occupation were found to influence the results. CONCLUSION: This investigation supports the need for better promotion of aphasia awareness to the public in southern Ontario and, by extension, in Canada.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".