MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2400080433 · doi:10.1177/154230501406800307

Canadian Licensing Changes and the Anticipated Impact on Islamic Spiritual Care and Counseling Practice in Ontario

2014· article· en· W2400080433 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nazila Isgandarova

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pastoral Care & Counseling Advancing theory and professional practice through scholarly and reflective publications · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion, Spirituality, and Psychology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIslamMental healthSpiritual careMental health careSpiritual practicePsychologyHealth careNursingMedicineAlternative medicineSpiritualityPsychotherapistPolitical scienceHistoryLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article highlights some significant aspects of the new regulations and the benefits of the College of Registered Psychotherapists and Registered Mental Health Therapists of Ontario (CRPO) with regard to the spiritual care and counseling practice of Muslim spiritual caregivers, including imams.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.173
Threshold uncertainty score0.960

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0160.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.374 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pastoral Care & Counseling Advancing theory and professional practice through scholarly and reflective publicationsSame topicReligion, Spirituality, and PsychologyFrench-language works237,207