MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051906917 · doi:10.1080/01634372.2012.690837

Gerontological Social Workers' Perceived Efficacy for Influencing Client Outcomes

2012· article· en· W2051906917 on OpenAlex
Robin P. Bonifas, Denise Gammonley, Kelsey Simons

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Gerontological Social Work · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoBaycrest Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial workPsychologySelf-efficacySocial supportNursingSocial psychologyMedicineEconomic growthEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using a sample of practitioners (n = 269) from the 2004 National Study of Licensed Social Workers, this article employs a quality assurance structure-process-outcome model to examine factors at the practitioner, workplace, and service delivery levels that influence the perceived efficacy of licensed gerontological social workers to affect client outcomes in the context of a highly challenging health care environment. A regression model accounted for 33.9% of the variance (adjusted R (2) = .291) in perceived efficacy with 3 aspects of service delivery satisfaction having significant effects: ability to address complex/chronic care, to influence the design of services, and to help clients navigate the system.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.169
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.318 · 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