MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319460945 · doi:10.1123/japa.2023-0006

Introduction From the New Editors

2023· editorial· en· W4319460945 on OpenAlexaff
Lindsay S. Nagamatsu, Patricia Heyn

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Aging and Physical Activity · 2023
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicQualitative Research Methods and Ethics
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is with honor that we have been selected to serve as Co-Editor-in-Chiefs for the Journal of Aging and Physical Activity (JAPA).As previous Associate Editors for the journal, we have both contributed to JAPA over the past many years by making editorial recommendations and shaping the strategic direction of the journal.We are excited to take on this new role where we will be able to have greater impact for leading the mission of JAPA to disseminate multidisciplinary research on the bi-directional relationship between physical activity and aging.With the growing population of older adults globally and the critical role that physical activity plays in physiological, cognitive, and mental health, as well as quality of life, this research is more important than ever for understanding the aging process and optimizing life and healthspan into our later years.First and foremost, we would like to sincerely thank our predecessor Dr. Samuel Nyman for his leadership over the past three years.During his tenure as Editor-in-Chief, Dr. Nyman significantly advanced the impact of JAPA by adding rigor and best publication standard practices.Among his many accomplishments, he increased the timeliness of reviews which now stand at an average of 54-60 days for first decisions on reviewed articles, improved the process for qualitative research papers by adding a new subsection to the instructions for authors based on the expertise of our qualitative Associate Editors, and introduced a series of high impact Virtual Special Issues with five published so far, the first of which was a collection from the past editors.Collectively, these initiatives have created a better experience for everyone that engages with JAPA, whether as an author or reader, and has promoted the timely publication of top-quality research in the field.We wish Samuel all the best in his new role as Head of the Department of Psychology at the University of Winchester where the impact of his leadership will continue to be appreciated.We would like to take this opportunity to briefly introduce ourselves to the contributors and readers of JAPA.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.074
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: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.160

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.074
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0060.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.004
Bibliometrics0.0080.003
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0180.008
Open science0.0060.004
Research integrity0.0210.026
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0480.041

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.498
Teacher spread0.405 · 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
GenreEditorial

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Aging and Physical ActivitySame topicQualitative Research Methods and EthicsFrench-language works237,207