MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2094631379 · doi:10.1007/s11136-006-0062-4

Issues in conducting cross-cultural research: implementation of an agreed international procotol designed by the WHOQOL Group for the conduct of focus groups eliciting the quality of life of older adults

2006· article· en· W2094631379 on OpenAlexaff
Graeme Hawthorne, Natasha Davidson, Kathryn Quinn, Farah McCrate, Ines Winkler, Ramona Lucas, Reinhold Kilian, Anita Molzahn

Bibliographic record

VenueQuality of Life Research · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth, psychology, and well-being
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAuditFocus groupQuality of Life ResearchQuality of life (healthcare)Quality (philosophy)MedicineCross-culturalPublic healthPsychologyGerontologyMedical educationApplied psychologyNursingSociologyBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.723
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.609
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.277
Threshold uncertainty score0.341

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.7230.609
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0170.014
Scholarly communication0.0090.008
Open science0.0110.014
Research integrity0.0100.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.601
GPT teacher head0.673
Teacher spread0.071 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designQualitative
DomainMethods
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

Citations40
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueQuality of Life ResearchSame topicHealth, psychology, and well-beingFrench-language works237,207