MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3116288757 · doi:10.1177/1471301220981241

Facilitating recruitment for dementia research: Insights from an international panel

2020· article· en· W3116288757 on OpenAlexaff
Mallorie T. Tam, Serge Gauthier, Kok Pin Ng, Frank E. Everett, Julie M. Robillard

Bibliographic record

VenueDementia · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPatient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsChildren's & Women's Health Centre of British ColumbiaMcGill UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaGerontologyPsychologyPeer reviewSet (abstract data type)Medical educationMedicineDiseasePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dementia research is critical to improve dementia care; however, participation in this research remains limited, and recruitment is challenging. During an international panel at the 2018 Alzheimer Disease International Conference in Chicago, presentations were given to raise the profile of dementia research and share the patient experience of research participation. We observed notable shifts in perspectives on research participation from 39 participants who completed a survey before and after the presentations. These findings set the stage for future studies exploring the strength of independent motivations for research participation as well as improving recruitment efforts through education and peer support.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.781
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.834
GPT teacher head0.565
Teacher spread0.269 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDementiaSame topicPatient-Provider Communication in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207