MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2079878696 · doi:10.1177/1084822312472055

Holistic Health and People With Spinal Cord Injuries

2013· article· en· W2079878696 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueHome Health Care Management & Practice · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEthics in medical practice
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRehabilitationNursingSpinal cord injuryHealth careMedicineHealth professionalsQualitative researchDescriptive researchPsychologyPhysical therapySpinal cordPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examined the perspectives of rehabilitation professionals in British Columbia on the use of holistic practices (HP) by their clients with spinal cord injury (SCI). This was a qualitative descriptive study with 13 rehabilitation professionals.Results show that health care practitioners serving those with SCI noted interest in and use of HP between 75% and 90% among their client groups. Most rehabilitation professionals already work in an interdisciplinary fashion with HP practitioners. Some were skeptical about HP, others saw a great benefit to their clients and others still only pursued HP when asked about it by their clients. Conclusions are that health care professionals are willing to acquire more knowledge about HP to provide the best available care. Participants showed interest in incorporating other aspects of health care to aid rehabilitation.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.668
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.494
Teacher spread0.431 · 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