MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3037482227 · doi:10.1177/0008417420929508

Remodeler sa vie® ( <i>Lifestyle Redesign</i> ) : première étude pilote auprès d’aînés franco-canadiens

2020· article· fr· W3037482227 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Marie‐Hélène Lévesque, Jordane Trépanier, Marie-Ève Tardif, Kevin Lalanne, Mélanie Boudriau, Sarah Ainsley, Charles Boislard, Mélanie Levasseur

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Occupational Therapy · 2020
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicAging and Gerontology Research
Canadian institutionsCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Saguenay–Lac-Saint-JeanCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de SherbrookeUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsHumanitiesGratitudePsychologyArtPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Description. Récemment traduit et adapté au contexte franco-canadien, le programme Remodeler sa vie ( Lifestyle Redesign) vise le développement de modes de vie sains et porteurs de sens. On connaît toutefois peu l’influence de ce programme chez les aînés francophones. But. Décrire l’influence du programme Remodeler sa vie sur l’équilibre de vie, l’engagement dans les activités signifiantes, la compassion et la gratitude d’aînés franco-canadiens. Méthodologie. Une étude pilote mixte (préexpérimental et qualitatif clinique) a été réalisée auprès de 16 aînés répartis en deux groupes (avec et sans incapacités). Des questionnaires pré et post-intervention ainsi que des entretiens semi-dirigés ont été complétés. Résultats. Une augmentation de l’équilibre de vie de l’ensemble participants ( p = 0,03) et de l’engagement dans des activités signifiantes des aînés sans incapacité ( p = 0,02) a été observée. Les participants rapportaient des améliorations pour l’ensemble des résultantes. Conséquences. Remodeler sa vie est un programme prometteur pour promouvoir la santé des aînés franco-canadiens.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.975
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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 head0.196
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Occupational TherapySame topicAging and Gerontology ResearchFrench-language works237,207