MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307092193 · doi:10.1007/s13679-022-00489-7

Can We Deliver Person-Centred Obesity Care Across the Globe?

2022· review· en· W4307092193 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Obesity Reports · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPrimary Care and Health Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlobeDignityHealth careCompassionMedicineNursingPsychologyPublic relationsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This article discusses what person-centred care is; why it is critically important in providing effective care of a chronic, complex disease like obesity; and what can be learnt from international best practice to inform global implementation. RECENT FINDINGS: There are four key principles to providing person-centred obesity care: providing care that is coordinated, personalised, enabling and delivered with dignity, compassion and respect. The Canadian 5AsT framework provides a co-developed person-centred obesity care approach that addresses complexity and is being tested internationally. Embedding person-centred obesity care across the globe will require a complex system approach to provide a framework for healthcare system redesign, advances in people-driven discovery and advocacy for policy change. Additional training, tools and resources are required to support local implementation, delivery and evaluation. Delivering high-quality, effective person-centred care across the globe will be critical in addressing the current obesity epidemic.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.889
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0060.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.207
GPT teacher head0.468
Teacher spread0.261 · 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