MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2480893127 · doi:10.1177/0829573516659935

Clinical Reasoning in School Psychology

2016· article· en· W2480893127 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jac J. W. Andrews, Maisha M. Syeda

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of School Psychology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEducational and Psychological Assessments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologySchool psychologyIntervention (counseling)Relevance (law)Medical educationApplied psychologyService delivery frameworkProcess (computing)Service (business)Clinical psychologyPsychiatryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

School psychologists typically conduct psychological and psychoeducational assessments, provide prevention and intervention services, and consult and collaborate with allied professionals (e.g., teachers, physicians, psychiatrists, physiotherapists, occupational therapists, social workers, and nurses) and parents toward better understanding and promoting the learning and development of children and youth. Within and across these roles, school psychologists maximize their judgments by utilizing psychometrically sound instruments, recommending and using empirically based intervention programs and approaches, and making informed decisions based on theory, research, and clinical experience. The purposes of this article and this special edition of the Canadian Journal of School Psychology are to promote the relevance and significance of clinical reasoning in this complex process of full service delivery and highlight examples of the effective thinking and decision making undertaken by school psychologists from assessment to intervention.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.130
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0360.004

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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.487
Teacher spread0.363 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations11
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of School PsychologySame topicEducational and Psychological AssessmentsFrench-language works237,207