MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2485586727 · doi:10.3399/bjgp16x686449

Book: <i>Love, Fear and Health: How Our Attachments to Others Shape Health and Health Care</i>

2016· article· en· W2485586727 on OpenAlexaffabout
J. Nilas Young

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of General Practice · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPrimary Care and Health Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoECW Press (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHealth careMedicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Love, Fear and Health: How Our Attachments to Others Shape Health and Health Care Robert Maunder and Jonathan Hunter University of Toronto Press, 2015, PB, 344pp, £17.99, 978-442615601 The theme of this book is attachment theory, which is not as dry as it sounds. Although my blase repartee ‘kiss me quick’ embarrassingly proved to be more attuned to my attachment status than a reflection of the pertinence of the content. In attachment theory feelings of security, or the lack of security in personal relationships has direct effects on health, …

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.195
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.386 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of General PracticeSame topicPrimary Care and Health OutcomesFrench-language works237,207