MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2254665860

Satisfacción con la vida y autoeficacia en jugadores de baloncesto en silla de ruedas

2016· article· es· W2254665860 on OpenAlexaff
Carlos Ma Tejero‐González, Ricardo de la Vega Marcos, Miguel Vaquero-Maestre, Roberto Ruiz Barquín

Bibliographic record

VenueLA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) · 2016
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Cord Injury Research
Canadian institutionsCanadian Armed Forces
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyExcellenceWheelchairBasketballPerceptionLife satisfactionInternal consistencyApplied psychologySocial psychologyClinical psychologyPsychometricsPolitical scienceGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

El objetivo del estudio fue analizar la relación entre satisfacción con la vida, y autoeficacia de movilidad en personas con discapacidad física que practican baloncesto en silla de ruedas. El estudio siguió un diseño ex post facto. La muestra fue de 103 participantes. Las mediciones se mostraron fiables, con altos coeficientes de consistencia interna. Los deportistas declararon altos niveles de satisfacción con la vida y de autoeficacia de movilidad en silla de ruedas. No se encontraron diferencias significativas en dichas variables en función del nivel de excelencia competitiva. Se concluye que la satisfacción con la vida está más relacionada con la percepción de autoeficacia de movilidad en silla de ruedas que con la edad o la clasificación funcional de los deportistas.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas)Same topicSpinal Cord Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207