MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123676851 · doi:10.1080/13561820802190616

The interdisciplinary condition of work in relational professions of the health and social care field: A theoretical standpoint

2008· article· en· W2123676851 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

VenueJournal of Interprofessional Care · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicInterprofessional Education and Collaboration
Canadian institutionsHealth and Social Services Centre University Institute of Geriatrics of Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsField (mathematics)Set (abstract data type)SociologyHealth careWork (physics)EpistemologyInterdisciplinarityEngineering ethicsSocial workPublic relationsPsychologySocial psychologySocial sciencePolitical scienceComputer scienceEngineeringLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The best-known theories on interdisciplinarity in the health and social care field seek to identify personal characteristics and organizational predispositions favourable to interprofessionnal collaboration. This paper proposes a reversal of this positioning through the theorization of interdisciplinarity in the health and social care field as a condition of the work of its professionals rather than one of their peculiar attributes. To achieve this reversal, we set out the epistemological foundations of the current debate on interdisciplinarity.

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 categoriesScience 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 score0.165
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.418 · 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