MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116005759 · doi:10.1177/1524839912442515

Using a Comprehensive Best Practices Approach to Strengthen Ethical Health-Related Practice

2012· article· en· W2116005759 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

VenueHealth Promotion Practice · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPublic Health Policies and Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBest practiceConsistency (knowledge bases)Engineering ethicsCritical reflectionPublic relationsSociologyPsychologyPolitical scienceComputer scienceEngineeringPedagogyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ethical conduct plays a vital role in ensuring that issues such as health inequities are addressed. The Interactive Domain Model (IDM), a comprehensive best practices approach, provides a guiding framework to integrate ethics into health-related practice. Its five tenets emphasize the importance of developing multiple best practices to ensure sensitivity to local circumstances; taking into account the complex and interactive nature of the world; ensuring consistency between practice and key elements such as values, theories, evidence, and understanding the environment; engaging in ongoing critical reflection; and following a continuous improvement practice cycle with active participation from priority populations. Ethical implications for each tenet and ways to meet the challenges related to acting ethically are discussed.

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.034
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-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: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.489
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.034
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.004
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.002

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 head0.515
GPT teacher head0.597
Teacher spread0.082 · 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