MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016491799 · doi:10.1002/erv.989

Setting the eating disorder aside: An alternative model of care

2010· article· en· W2016491799 on OpenAlexafffund
Kim Williams, Tracey Dobney, Josie Geller

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Eating Disorders Review · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEating Disorders and Behaviors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouver Coastal HealthSt. Paul's Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMichael Smith Health Research BC
KeywordsOutreachGeneral partnershipContext (archaeology)Eating disordersPsychologyQuality of life (healthcare)PsychiatryPsychotherapistPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Eating disorder treatment typically involves psychotherapy, structured programmes to normalize eating behaviours, and weight restoration. Unfortunately some individuals who receive these treatments do not recover. The Community Outreach Partnership Program (COPP) was developed to address the needs of these individuals. Using a team approach which combines both community and hospital services, COPP assists clients increase their quality of life by fostering independence, increasing hope and enhancing social skills in the context of the client's economic, social and physical living environment. Preliminary outcome research reveals significant improvement in eating disorder and psychiatric symptoms in individuals who complete four or more months of COPP.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0050.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.003

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations69
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Eating Disorders ReviewSame topicEating Disorders and BehaviorsFrench-language works237,207