MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2105705760 · doi:10.1177/1049732302250334

Defining Recovery: An Interactionist Analysis of Mental Health Policy Development, Wisconsin 1996-1999

2003· article· en· W2105705760 on OpenAlexaff
Nora Jacobson

Bibliographic record

VenueQualitative Health Research · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMental Health and Patient Involvement
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersNational Institute of Mental Health
KeywordsWorkgroupOperationalizationSymbolic interactionismMental healthSociologySet (abstract data type)Participant observationPsychologyPublic relationsEpistemologySocial sciencePolitical scienceComputer sciencePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The author examines how, as part of a reform of Wisconsin's public mental health system, a workgroup of system stakeholders defined and operationalized the concept of recovery. Based on participant observation, document analysis, and interviews, with an analytic framework drawn from symbolic interactionism, the author finds that although individual members held a range of definitions of recovery, the workgroup was able to reach consensus in its policy recommendations through processual means and by tacitly agreeing on a set of overarching values that were flexible enough to accommodate many definitions.

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)0.034
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.359
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0340.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0050.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.679
GPT teacher head0.680
Teacher spread0.001 · 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.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations24
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQualitative Health ResearchSame topicMental Health and Patient InvolvementFrench-language works237,207