MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2734096820 · doi:10.1093/geroni/igx004.4638

COMPETENCIES INCLUDED IN GERONTOLOGY JOB POSTINGS: AN INTERNATIONAL COMPARISON

2017· article· en· W2734096820 on OpenAlexaff
Birgit Pianosi

Bibliographic record

VenueInnovation in Aging · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeotourism and Geoheritage Conservation
Canadian institutionsHuntington University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGerontologyWork (physics)Job marketPsychologyMedical educationMedicineEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As society is ageing, experts from a wide range of professions will work with and for older adults. Some of these professionals are specifically trained to work with older adults, some have a different training with a specialization in older adults or ageing, while others have an occupational training without specific competencies in gerontology. This is true for most industrialized countries, including those located in Europe and North America. In this study, the job market in the field of gerontology is explored internationally and the competencies as described in the job postings are identified.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInnovation in AgingSame topicGeotourism and Geoheritage ConservationFrench-language works237,207