MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

What information and support do people seek to help them make decisions about self-care?

2002· article· en· W2083940996 on OpenAlexaff
Jennifer Mullett, Marcia Hills

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Health Promotion and Education · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFamily and Patient Care in Intensive Care Units
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionHealth carePsychologyNursingSelf carePublic relationsMedicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research indicates that most self-care interventions and education strategies lead to an increase in self-care behaviours and more informed health decisions by participants. What is less clear from these studies is the type of information the public seeks to aid their decision making. For one year participants were asked to keep a health diary recording their health issues and what steps they took to solve them. The data from 153 health diaries containing 812 health issues were analysed. Analysis revealed the most frequent health issues, examples of decisions about self-care, information seeking behaviours and an indication of how and for what purpose participants used the self-care resources.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.755
Threshold uncertainty score0.485

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.320 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations3
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Health Promotion and EducationSame topicFamily and Patient Care in Intensive Care UnitsFrench-language works237,207