MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2746202284 · doi:10.1177/174183051601400103

Calmly Coping: A Motivational Interviewing via Co-Active Life Coaching (MI-VIA-CALC) Pilot Intervention for University Students with Perceived Levels of High Stress

2016· article· en· W2746202284 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational journal of evidence based coaching and mentoring · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCoaching Methods and Impact
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoachingMotivational interviewingPsychologyCoping (psychology)Clinical psychologyIntervention (counseling)Applied psychologyPsychotherapistPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stress is a campus problem. This pre-post pilot study assessed the impact of Motivational Interviewing via Co-Active Life Coaching (MI-via-CALC) on the stress management of 30 full-time, English-speaking Canadian undergraduate students, aged 17-24 years. Participants were assessed using the Perceived Stress Scale and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale at pre-, mid-, and post-intervention. Three one-way, repeated-measures ANOVAs were completed. Statistically significant differences in stress reduction were found between pre-intervention to mid-intervention and between pre-intervention to post-intervention. No statistically significant differences occurred between mid- to post-intervention. Inductive content analysis of qualitative interviews at pre-, mid-, and post-intervention revealed participants’ positive experiences.

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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.592
Threshold uncertainty score0.549

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.179
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.247 · 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