MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122122843 · doi:10.1093/heapro/dar048

'About time!' Insights from Research with Pride: a community-student collaboration

2011· article· en· W2122122843 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kira Abelsohn, J Ferne, Kelly A. Scanlon, Brody Giambrone, Sivan Bomze

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Promotion International · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCommunity Health and Development
Canadian institutionsRegent Park Community Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrideGeneral partnershipPublic relationsHealth promotionLesbianParticipatory action researchService-learningCommunity-based participatory researchPromotion (chess)SociologyCommunity organizationCommunity healthDowntownPublic healthPolitical sciencePedagogyMedicineNursingGender studiesPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research with Pride (RwP) was a community-student collaborative initiative to promote and build capacity for community-based research exploring health and wellness in lesbian, bisexual, trans and queer (LGBTQ) communities. The event took place at University of Toronto's Dalla Lana School of Public Health (DLSPH) in September 2009, and engaged over 100 students, community members and academic researchers in a full day of discussion, learning and networking. RwP was initiated by a group of graduate students in Health Promotion who identified a gap in resources addressing LGBTQ health, facilitating their further learning and work in this area. By engaging in a partnership with a community service organization serving LGBTQ communities in downtown Toronto, RwP emerges as a key example of the role of community-student partnerships in the pursuit of LGBTQ health promotion. This paper will describe the nature of this partnership, outline its strengths and challenges and emphasize the integral role of community-student partnerships in health promotion initiatives.

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 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)0.048
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.058
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.253

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0480.058
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0430.033
Scholarly communication0.0270.020
Open science0.0040.034
Research integrity0.0080.018
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.359
GPT teacher head0.542
Teacher spread0.183 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations8
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Promotion InternationalSame topicCommunity Health and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207