MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2564976682 · doi:10.11575/prism/9438

British Columbia problem gambling prevalence study : final report

2008· article· en· W2564976682 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePRISM (University of Calgary) · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGambling Behavior and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemographyGeographySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The following report presents the results of a survey conducted by Ipsos Reid and Gemini Research on behalf of the Gaming Policy and Enforcement Branch of British Columbia’s Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General. The main objectives of this research were to determine the prevalence and nature of gambling and problem gambling within the adult population of British Columbia, as well as to compare findings to prior surveys completed in British Columbia and in other Canadian provinces. Problem gambling estimates were assessed using the Canadian Problem Gambling Index (CPGI). The survey results are based on a telephone survey with a representative sample of 3,000 adult (18+) British Columbians. Interviews were conducted in English, Chinese and Punjabi between August 29 and October 5, 2007. All data have been weighted to accurately reflect the actual age, gender and regional distribution of adult British Columbians according to 2006 Census figures. The survey’s overall margin of error is ±1.8%, 95 times out of 100.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.226 · 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