MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2751220217

Evaluation of Girls Rock: An Intervention Program for Girls in Grades 4, 5 and 6

2017· article· en· W2751220217 on OpenAlexaff
Jenna Shaddock

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicSports and Physical Education Research
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClubIntervention (counseling)PsychologyObservational studySelf-esteemDevelopmental psychologyMedical educationMedicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Girls Rock is a community-based program designed specifically for the needs of girls in Grades 4, 5 and 6. This program aimed to increase psychological and physiological components through classroom and physical activity based sessions over an 8-week period. Specifically, a total of 23 girls, from four different Boys and Girls Club locations, participated in Girls Rock, and the program with the objectives of were to increaseing positive body image, self-esteem, self-efficacy and fundamental movement skills. The present research study involved conductinged an outcome evaluation to assess the effectiveness of Girls Rock in achieving its objectives. Data collected pre- and post-intervention , through questionnaires and observational assessment, revealed that participation in Girls Rock significantly increased positive body image, self-esteem, and self-efficacy, and , and partially increased fundamental movement skills. This information can be used to attain the future goals of recruiting more participants, retaining those already involved, and expanding to other clubs.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.422
GPT teacher head0.684
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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 topicSports and Physical Education ResearchFrench-language works237,207