MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2729544622 · doi:10.5334/ijic.2512

When Equity is Central to Research: Implications for Researchers and Consumers in the Research Team

2016· article· en· W2729544622 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Nicolette Sheridan, Timothy Kenealy, Lynette Stewart, Debra Lampshire, Te Tuhi Robust, John Parsons, Ann McKillop, Yves Couturier, Jean‐Louis Denis, Martin J. Connolly

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Integrated Care · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchWorld Health Organization
KeywordsEquity (law)IndigenousPublic relationsConsumer researchMarketingHealth equityInequalityAffect (linguistics)Equity theoryBusinessPublic economicsPolitical scienceSociologyEconomic growthHealth careEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper is a response to our recognition that approaches to equity and consumer involvement in research differed in emphasis between our researchers and jurisdictions. Whilst we shared common aspirations we varied in our priorities between equity groups and methods to represent consumer interests. New Zealand has a historical focus on equity for indigenous Maori and shares with Canada concern about enduring inequalities that affect people's lives.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.778
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.248
GPT teacher head0.529
Teacher spread0.282 · 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.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Integrated CareSame topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207