MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2799962471 · doi:10.24095/hpcdp.38.4.01f

Exploration de l’impact du « nouveau » ParticipACTION : aperçu et présentation du numéro spécial

2018· article· fr· W2799962471 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Guy Faulkner, Lira Yun, Mark S. Tremblay, John C. Spence

Bibliographic record

VenuePromotion de la santé et prévention des maladies chroniques au Canada · 2018
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSport and Mega-Event Impacts
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ParticipACTION est un organisme de communications et de marketing social voué à la promotion de l’activité physique au Canada, qui a été fondé à l’automne 1971, a cessé ses activités en 2001 et a été relancé en 2007. Conçues comme une expérience naturelle en santé publique, les données probantes ont été tirées à la fois d’une enquête fondée sur la population et portant sur les connaissances, la sensibilisation, la compréhension de l’activité physique et les niveaux d’activité physique des Canadiens (à l’échelle de l’individu) et de sondages et d’entrevues auprès d’informateurs clés visant à examiner le pouvoir d’action, l’état de préparation et le soutien des organisations en matière de promotion de l’activité physique (à l’échelle de l’organisation). Cet article vise en premier lieu à donner un aperçu de certaines des principales initiatives entreprises par la « nouvelle version » de ParticipACTION susceptibles d’avoir contribué à des changements sur le plan individuel ou organisationnel. En second lieu, il prépare le terrain pour les trois études empiriques de cette série d’articles consacrée aux résultats de suivi.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.966
Threshold uncertainty score0.102

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0080.008
Scholarly communication0.0140.008
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.331 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePromotion de la santé et prévention des maladies chroniques au CanadaSame topicSport and Mega-Event ImpactsFrench-language works237,207