MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Integrating Self-Efficacy and Aging Theories to Promote Behavior Change and Reduce Stroke Risk

2006· review· en· W2091742014 on OpenAlex
Sandra Ireland, Heather M. Arthur

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 Neuroscience Nursing · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBehavioral Health and Interventions
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityHamilton Health Sciences
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStroke (engine)MedicineIncidence (geometry)Compensation (psychology)Self-efficacyGerontologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The increasing incidence of stroke has resulted in the establishment of secondary stroke prevention clinics. Such clinics have successfully reduced wait-to-treatment times for individuals diagnosed with transient ischemic attack or minor stroke. In addition to improving access to consultation, diagnosis, and treatment, healthcare clinics need to implement behavioral risk-reduction programs tailored to older adults to help them better adhere to treatment regimens. The integration of two social-psychological theories--(a) self-efficacy and (b) selection, optimization, and compensation-provide the foundation for an approach that could lead to the development of evidence-based behavioral risk-reduction programs for older adults at high risk of stroke.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.997
Threshold uncertainty score0.945

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.181
GPT teacher head0.489
Teacher spread0.308 · 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