MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1990912054 · doi:10.1177/1524839905278590

Using the Internet to Build Community Capacity for Healthy Public Policy

2006· article· en· W1990912054 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Promotion Practice · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCommunity Health and Development
Canadian institutionsCalgary Laboratory ServicesProvincial Laboratory of Public Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThe InternetPublic healthBusinessPublic relationsPublic policyEnvironmental healthInternet privacyPolitical scienceMedicineEconomic growthNursingComputer scienceWorld Wide WebEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An interactive Web site and e-mail campaign became the primary focus of a coalition's community mobilization strategy to advocate for changes to the local smoking bylaw in a large Canadian urban center. This article presents the findings of an Internet survey of 2,200 Internet mailing list recipients in which 26% (n=605) submitted responses. Findings from four focus groups of the survey respondents (n=28) are also reported. The survey found that a majority of the mailing list respondents (66.1%) contacted the city council during the campaign. Only 35.8% of respondents had contacted a city council member prior to this campaign. As a result of their participation in the Internet campaign, 50.6% stated that they were more likely to get involved in future civic issues. These findings were confirmed by focus groups that found increased capacity for political involvement on this issue as well as capacity for future social and political action.

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.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.601
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
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 head0.442
GPT teacher head0.556
Teacher spread0.114 · 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