MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2189527879 · doi:10.1177/174183051501300103

Health Behaviour Outcomes of Co-Active Coaching Interventions: A Scoping Review

2015· review· en· W2189527879 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

VenueInternational journal of evidence based coaching and mentoring · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCoaching Methods and Impact
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionCoachingPsychologyApplied psychologyPsychotherapistPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this paper was to conduct a scoping review on Co-Active (Life) Coaching (CALC) literature related to health behaviour change. The scoping methodological framework developed by Arksey and O'Malley (2005) informed the retrieval of appropriate articles. Six questions provided an in-depth exploration of CALC in the health coaching literature. This paper provides a broad overview of the current status of CALC literature in the area and underscores its utility to help facilitate health behaviour-related outcomes. The CALC approach offers a promising intervention for a variety of health conditions. Future larger-scale studies with increased experimental rigor are recommended.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.970
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.501
GPT teacher head0.613
Teacher spread0.112 · 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