MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2913538129 · doi:10.7202/1058250ar

Sexuality in Rehabilitation: Supporting Canadian Practitioners Conceptually Towards Client Enablement

2019· article· en· W2913538129 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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Bioethics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Therapy Practice and Research
Canadian institutionsBaycrest HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSexologyHuman sexualityScope (computer science)Subject (documents)RehabilitationScope of practicePsychologyPlan (archaeology)Engineering ethicsNursingComputer scienceApplied psychologyMedicineSociologyHealth carePolitical scienceGender studiesWorld Wide WebEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article explores the many dimensions of sex which result in very strong moral and ethical responses. In support of practitioners who wish to feel more comfortable and competent discussing sexual matters, the article then introduces a hybrid conceptual model of practice. Combining one model originally from sexology and another from occupational therapy, the Ex-PLISSIT Enablement Model offers a flexible, progressively-staged framework to guide practitioners toward a plan to better understand and work within their own scope while also assessing if clients are ready and willing to engage with the subject to varying degrees.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.721
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.151
GPT teacher head0.501
Teacher spread0.350 · 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