MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388146296 · doi:10.15353/cjo.v84i2.4977

10 Ways to Market Your Practice for Free

2022· article· en· W4388146296 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian journal of optometry/CJO. Canadian journal of optometry · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicResearch in Social Sciences
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFree marketBusinessPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

P 10 Ways to Market Your Practice for Free T here are plenty of tools available to help you get the word out about your Optometry practice.You have to find them, use them, and learn how to get the best results. REFERR ALSHappy patients bring more happy patients.Adding a referral program may encourage your patients to go out and tell the world.Look to other practices and businesses to see how they reward referrals.It doesn't cost anything for your patients to tell their friends and family. DISCOUNT CARDSWhen a patient is leaving, hand them something valuable.Provide them with a business card that includes their prescription and their next appointment.Give them a voucher they can use towards a second pair of glasses or give a family member. APPOINTMENT & PRODUCT REMINDERSYou know when patients are due for their next appointment.A friendly reminder closer to the date prompts them to return.Either pre-appoint them at the time of the last appointment or call to book them annually.Then ensure you send reminders so they show up.Same with products, remind them when they are running out. GET ONLINE!Let your brand and voice carry seamlessly between your in-office personality and your online brand. HAVE A GREAT WEBSITEBuild a website that contains your name, phone number, e-mail address, and location but also that is beautiful, engaging with lots of information about what makes you different and unique.Talk about any medical niches you are implementing in the practice like dry eye treatments or vision therapy.You're going to need to link to this site, so it's best if you have a great website that ranks well.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Open science, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.312
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.009
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0060.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0260.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.365 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian journal of optometry/CJO. Canadian journal of optometrySame topicResearch in Social SciencesFrench-language works237,207