MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391952918 · doi:10.15353/cjo.v86i1.5598

Creating a Social Media Strategy for Your Eye Care Practice

2024· article· en· W4391952918 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Will Cowan

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian journal of optometry/CJO. Canadian journal of optometry · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Media in Health Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial mediaSocial careOptometrySociologyComputer scienceNursingMedicineWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Regarding marketing in the digital landscape, there are two absolute must-haves: a website and a solid social media strategy. Think of your website as your practice’s digital home. Patients can review your services, meet your team, and conveniently book an appointment here. But to bring quality leads to your website and ultimately to the exam chair, you’ll need to harness the power of social media. However, there’s more to social media than meet the eye. This guide will help you develop a strategy that truly connects with the type of patients you want to see.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.103

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.001
Science and technology studies0.0200.008
Scholarly communication0.0220.017
Open science0.0020.017
Research integrity0.0090.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0310.011

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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.477
Teacher spread0.378 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian journal of optometry/CJO. Canadian journal of optometrySame topicSocial Media in Health EducationFrench-language works237,207