MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2439355662 · doi:10.1177/1473325016652679

From diagnosis to research: My epistemological journey toward wholistic qualitative methods

2016· article· en· W2439355662 on OpenAlexaff
Julia Read

Bibliographic record

VenueQualitative Social Work · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicQualitative Research Methods and Ethics
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQualitative researchEpistemologySociologyPsychologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, I reflect on my ever-evolving epistemological journey through which I came to embrace a “wholistic” qualitative methodology for my doctoral research in social work. I offer a chronological account of my lived experiences starting with my locus of origin and highlighting the challenging twists and turns that brought me to my research interest of exploring meaningful peer support relationships in mental health and addictions agencies.

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)0.344
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.269
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.656
Threshold uncertainty score0.809

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.3440.269
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0170.118
Scholarly communication0.0290.032
Open science0.0070.023
Research integrity0.0090.028
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.863
GPT teacher head0.741
Teacher spread0.123 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designQualitative
DomainMethods
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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQualitative Social WorkSame topicQualitative Research Methods and EthicsFrench-language works237,207