MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

South Australia's First Family Therapist — Jeff Gerrard Remembers: An Interview

2006· article· en· W2044904631 on OpenAlexaff
Lorraine Read, Jeff's

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian and New Zealand Journal of Family Therapy · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCounseling, Therapy, and Family Dynamics
Canadian institutionsChild, Adolescent and Family Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFamily therapyProject commissioningWhite (mutation)PublishingPsychologyField (mathematics)PsychotherapistPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Jeff Gerrard can claim the distinction of being the first family therapist in South Australia. Early on in his career as a psychiatrist he explored the growing field of psychotherapy overseas and observed, studied, and trained with some of the historical greats in the area. When he returned to South Australia in the early 70s, it seems to have been a natural step for him to begin practising family therapy and training other health professionals in the theory and practice of family therapy. The early training that Jeff led at the South Australian Children's Hospital enabled a cooperation between a number of early family therapists, such as Michael White and Anne Sved Williams, to train the first cohort of people who would later go on to become significant contributors to the family therapy field in Australia. In this interview, Lorraine Read invites Jeff to explore his early contributions to the field and to discuss the training and supervision experiences which were/are important in his development as a family therapist.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.133
Threshold uncertainty score0.264

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0200.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0060.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations2
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian and New Zealand Journal of Family TherapySame topicCounseling, Therapy, and Family DynamicsFrench-language works237,207