MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4232364091 · doi:10.2147/jhl.s139029

Ottawa Model of Implementation Leadership and Implementation Leadership Scale: mapping concepts for developing and evaluating theory-based leadership interventions [Corrigendum]

2017· erratum· en· W4232364091 on OpenAlexaffabout
Wendy Gifford, Ian D. Graham, Mark G. Ehrhart, Barbara Davies, Gregory A. Aarons

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Healthcare Leadership · 2017
Typeerratum
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Teacher Training
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionScale (ratio)Shared leadershipLeadership styleLeadership studiesPsychologyComputer scienceManagementPolitical sciencePublic relationsEconomicsGeographyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

[This corrects the article on p. 15 in vol. 9.].

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)0.042
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.176
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.389
Threshold uncertainty score0.773

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0420.176
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.007
Bibliometrics0.0070.008
Science and technology studies0.0040.006
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0070.005
Research integrity0.0040.014
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.005

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 head0.705
GPT teacher head0.554
Teacher spread0.151 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Healthcare LeadershipSame topicEducation and Teacher TrainingFrench-language works237,207