MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3040977851 · doi:10.11124/jbisrir-d-19-00293

Exploring the terminology and descriptions of services that connect children with neurodisability and their families to needed support in the community: a scoping review protocol

2020· review· en· W3040977851 on OpenAlexaff
Grace A. Lin, Emily Gardiner, Vivian Wong, Andrea Ryce, Anton R. Miller

Bibliographic record

VenueJBI Evidence Synthesis · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
Canadian institutionsSunny Hill Health Centre for ChildrenUniversity of British ColumbiaB.C. Women's Hospital & Health CentreMcMaster UniversityBC Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerminologyCINAHLContext (archaeology)Grey literaturePopulationInclusion (mineral)Protocol (science)Heading (navigation)Computer scienceMEDLINEPsychologyMedicinePolitical scienceAlternative medicineSocial psychologyEngineeringGeographyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: This scoping review aims to fill a gap in knowledge on terminology and descriptions of services that connect children with neurodisability and their families to needed support in the community. INTRODUCTION: Children with neurodisability represent a significant population with a demonstrated need for coordinated support. Patient navigation is a concept that was founded on the principle of coordinating care for patients based on individual needs. Despite the history of patient navigation, a definition for the concept itself is lacking. Moreover, children with neurodisability and their families are not often the target population of such initiatives. It is not known whether existing terminology and descriptions encompass the particular needs of children with neurodisability and their families. INCLUSION CRITERIA: This review will examine published, peer-reviewed articles related to navigation-type resources, support, and services within the community as intended for children under the age of 18 years with neurodisability, and their families. All eligible studies pertaining to this context will be examined. METHODS: A preliminary search was completed to find initial search terms, upon which a full search strategy was developed. Search results yielded from PubMed (NCBI), MEDLINE (Ovid), and CINAHL (EBSCO) were screened to ensure articles were peer-reviewed, published in English from 1990 onward, and relevant to both children with neurodisability/their families and navigation-related resources. A full-text review of relevant articles will be conducted and data extracted using the included extraction tool. Extracted terminology and concepts will be analyzed using a modified grounded theory approach, which will inform a working definition of navigational services and related terms. SCOPING REVIEW REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework: https://osf.io/cbvy9.

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)0.113
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.102
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: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.113
Threshold uncertainty score0.597

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1130.102
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.011
Bibliometrics0.0440.031
Science and technology studies0.0060.007
Scholarly communication0.0100.012
Open science0.0070.010
Research integrity0.0090.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.005

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 head0.147
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.225 · 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
GenreProtocol

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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJBI Evidence SynthesisSame topicCerebral Palsy and Movement DisordersFrench-language works237,207