MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2181169372 · doi:10.1111/1460-6984.12204

International patterns of the public awareness of aphasia

2015· article· en· W2181169372 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Language & Communication Disorders · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of OttawaMarch of Dimes Canada
FundersBritish Academy
KeywordsAphasiaPsychologyLanguage disorderDevelopmental psychologyCognitive psychologyPsychiatryCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: It has been suggested that public awareness of aphasia is vital for extending services, research support, social inclusion and targeted raising of awareness. Earlier studies show that knowledge of aphasia varies across a range of variables, but is very low compared with other conditions. AIMS: To report a series of surveys of public awareness of aphasia from six countries, the largest study conducted this far. METHODS & PROCEDURES: Surveys were conducted in Argentina (N = 800), Canada (N = 831), Croatia (N = 400), Greece (N = 800), Norway (N = 251) and Slovenia (N = 400) using the same methodology requesting information on age, sex and occupation, asking whether respondents had heard of aphasia and where they had heard of it. Respondents were tested on their levels of knowledge of aphasia. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: Results revealed low levels of awareness of aphasia in countries surveyed with marked variability that appeared to interact with occupation, country, age and sex. We surveyed 3483 respondents (mean age = 43.16; SD = 17.68). Between 60% (Croatia) and 16% (Slovenia) said they had heard of aphasia (37.1% overall), but those with actual knowledge ranged from 13.9% (Norway) to 1.0% (Argentina). The combined mean of those with basic knowledge was 9.2%. Those who had heard of aphasia were younger; and females had higher levels of awareness. We also found associations between socio-economic status and awareness. Those working in health, social and educational spheres had the highest levels. Respondents mainly heard about aphasia through the media and work or personal contact with aphasia. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: Levels of awareness are low everywhere in absolute terms, and relative to the awareness of other conditions, with significant variability between countries, sex and socio-economic status. We examine how surveys can be utilized to plan ways to increase understanding and discuss the comparison of awareness of aphasia with other conditions.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.237
Threshold uncertainty score0.522

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
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 science0.0030.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.297 · 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