MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2903902716 · doi:10.1080/23779497.2018.1556112

Psychosocial and behavioural aspects of early incident response: outcomes from an international workshop

2018· article· en· W2903902716 on OpenAlexafffund
Holly Carter, Louis Gauntlett, G. James Rubin, David Russell, Mélissa Généreux, Louise Lemyre, Peter G. Blain, Mark Byers, Richard Amlôt

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Security Health Science and Policy · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisaster Management and Resilience
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPreparednessPsychosocialEmergency managementTerrorismIncident managementPsychologyDisaster responsePublic relationsDisaster planningPolitical scienceMedicineApplied psychologySuicide preventionPoison controlMedical emergencyComputer securityComputer sciencePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The likelihood of major incidents and disasters has increased in recent years, due to climate change, urbanisation, and acts of terrorism. Effective management of such incidents is crucial to ensure that members of the public are able and willing to take appropriate protective actions. The workshop described in this paper brought together researchers, practitioners and policy makers with expertise in emergency planning, preparedness and response to generate recommendations for major incident management. Workshop participants agreed that understanding the psychosocial aspects of major incidents is crucial to effective incident response, and a number of key themes were raised during workshop discussions. Based on these themes, four key recommendations can be made for informing planning and preparedness for major incidents.

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 score0.210
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.400 · 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

Citations11
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Security Health Science and PolicySame topicDisaster Management and ResilienceFrench-language works237,207