MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014461686 · doi:10.1080/10410230802056388

An Exploratory Study of Canadian Aboriginal Online Health Care Forums

2008· article· en· W2014461686 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 Communication · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Literacy and Information Accessibility
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThe InternetPublic relationsHealth careHealth literacySociologyHealth educationPoliticsPolitical sciencePsychologyWorld Wide WebComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Internet-based discussion forums provide access to health information and social support, and serve as a resource for others. This investigation analyzed health-oriented Aboriginal Internet discussion forum (Forum A; Forum B) conversations. The findings were framed with Nutbeam's model of health literacy. Discussions within Forum B were centralized around issues of political activism and advocacy regarding Aboriginal health care. Activity in Forum A encouraged the development of "virtual" social capital, with health care discussions providing a "just-in-time" model for health education. Members of Forum A functioned as a smoking cessation self-help group and as health educators. The Internet provided a venue for the dissemination of health information and also served as a virtual voice for lifestyle coaching, political action, community building, and advocacy.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.440
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.129
GPT teacher head0.511
Teacher spread0.382 · 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