MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4365393327 · doi:10.7202/1097641ar

Évaluation de la fidélité interjuges d’une grille d’observation des comportements d’offre active de services en français dans le cadre d’activités d’apprentissage par simulation

2023· article· fr· W4365393327 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Coralie Vincent, Alexandra M. Bodnaruc, Jacinthe Savard, Cris-Carelle Kengneson, Josée Benoît, Isabelle Giroux

Bibliographic record

VenueMinorités linguistiques et société · 2023
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicInterpreting and Communication in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dans les régions canadiennes où les communautés francophones vivent en situation minoritaire, l’offre active (OA) de services en français consiste à proposer des services en français de façon proactive et dès le premier contact. Dans le contexte des services sociaux et de santé, l’OA contribue à la qualité, à la sécurité et à l’équité des soins destinés à ces communautés. La Grille d’observation des indicateurs de compétence en OA a été créée pour évaluer cette compétence chez les futurs professionnels dans un contexte d’apprentissage par simulation. Le présent projet de recherche visait à poursuivre l’évaluation métrologique de la grille en mesurant sa fidélité interjuges grâce au coefficient de corrélation intraclasse (CCI). Les résultats ont démontré un niveau de fidélité globale élevé (CCI = 0,87), ce qui permet d’encourager l’utilisation de la grille dans les milieux d’apprentissage. Des recherches supplémentaires permettront d’évaluer la fidélité de la grille dans divers contextes et d’assurer l’amélioration continue de la formation des futurs professionnels sur l’OA.

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.066
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.141

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.066
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.374 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMinorités linguistiques et sociétéSame topicInterpreting and Communication in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207