MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2151015408 · doi:10.1176/appi.ps.56.11.1444

Brief Reports: The Fidelity of Supported Employment Implementation in Canada and the United States

2005· article· en· W2151015408 on OpenAlex
Marc Corbière, Gary R. Bond, Elliot M. Goldner, Tasha Ptasinski

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychiatric Services · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersHealth CanadaCanadian Psychiatric Research Foundation
KeywordsSupported employmentFidelityScale (ratio)Vocational educationMental illnessPsychologyPolitical scienceMental healthPsychiatryGeographyComputer scienceEngineeringPedagogyWork (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Supported employment has been documented in the United States as an evidence-based practice that helps people with severe mental illness obtain and maintain employment. The evidence is strongest for the programs that follow the individual placement and support model. This brief report examines the degree to which supported employment programs in British Columbia, Canada, are similar to those in the United States. Data from the Quality of Supported Employment Implementation Scale were compiled in 2003 for ten supported employment programs from vocational agencies in British Columbia and were compared with data from 106 supported employment programs and 38 non-supported employment programs in the United States. Overall, the Canadian supported employment programs that followed the individual placement and support model had the highest fidelity.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.182

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.286 · 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