MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4241535645 · doi:10.1093/abm/kaab058

2020 International Behavioural Trials Network (IBTN) Conference Abstracts

2021· article· en· W4241535645 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Behavioral Medicine · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Research Topics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHealth psychologyPsychologyMedicinePublic healthPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To optimize the uptake and impact of behavioural interventions in the context of non-communicable chronic diseases (NCD) prevention and treatment, we need more quantity and better quality of evidence. To accomplish this, we need to cultivate a culture among behavioural trialists that espouses the rigorous development and testing of carefully designed, well-defined behavioural interventions that are seen as relevant and implementable by healthcare systems and third party payers. To advance this agenda, a group of international investigators, led by Drs. Simon Bacon, Kim Lavoie, and Gregory Ninot, created the International Behavioural Trials Network (IBTN), which currently has 842 members from six continents. The mission of the IBTN (www.ibtnetwork.org) is to foster global improvement in the quality of behavioural trials and in trial implementation, and to share a repository for existing recommendations, tools, and methodology on behavioural trials and intervention development. The goal is to develop a more solid and widely accepted evidence base for the transferability of behavioural interventions into disease prevention, health promotion and intervention practice and policy. The members of the IBTN met for their 3rd international conference on May 28-29, 2020, based in Montreal, Canada but held virtually. The meeting had 743 registrants that included researchers, clinicians, public health and implementation specialists, trainees and other stakeholders from 43 countries, and featured 25 presentations with a total of 44 speakers. The 36 peer-reviewed abstracts that were presented via virtual poster sessions are presented below.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.766
Threshold uncertainty score0.971

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0300.000

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 head0.659
GPT teacher head0.601
Teacher spread0.058 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Behavioral MedicineSame topicMental Health Research TopicsFrench-language works237,207