MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2169731836 · doi:10.1080/10826080701530720

Aboriginal Community Alcohol Harm Reduction Policy (ACAHRP) Project: A Vision for the Future

2007· article· en· W2169731836 on OpenAlexaffabout
Louis Gliksman, Margaret Rylett, Ronald R. Douglas

Bibliographic record

VenueSubstance Use & Misuse · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCommunity Health and Development
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRecreationHarm reductionLicenseHarmEnvironmental healthRentingPoison controlSuicide preventionBusinessPolitical sciencePsychologyPublic healthMedicineSocial psychologyLawNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Four First Nation communities in Ontario, Canada, formulated alcohol management policies between 1992 and 1994. An alcohol management policy is a local control option to manage alcohol use in recreation and leisure areas. Survey results indicate that decreases in alcohol use-related problems related to intoxication, nuisance behaviors, criminal activity, liquor license violations, and personal harm were perceived to have occurred. Furthermore, having policy regulations in place did not have an adverse effect on facility rentals. Band administrators and facility staff in each community felt the policy had had a positive effect on events at which alcohol was sold or served.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.549
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.129
GPT teacher head0.514
Teacher spread0.384 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations5
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSubstance Use & MisuseSame topicCommunity Health and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207