MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4398194833 · doi:10.24124/2023/59507

Enhancing counsellor development: A manual for planning a conference for counsellors in Canada’s North

2023· dissertation· en· W4398194833 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sandra Boulianne

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Therapy Practice and Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmpowermentPsychologyTheme (computing)Medical educationMedicineNursingPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

,Counsellors working in Canada’s North face many unique challenges such as “workload and complexity of client issues, geographical and social isolation, and high personnel and staff turnover” (O’Neill et al, 2013, p.3). This project will describe those challenges in more detail as well as strengths that are part of rural and remote communities and practice. This project will also include the rationale for bringing counsellors together for a multi-day conference. The terms counsellor, therapist and practitioner will be used interchangeably and refer to those practicing counselling therapy. A definition of counselling therapy provided by The Federation of Associations for Counselling Therapists in BC is as follows: The practice of counselling therapy assists people experiencing difficulties in relationships, or within themselves, and enhances their growth and well-being, by making use of relational, conversational, somatic, expressive, or educational methods and techniques informed by established counselling and psychotherapeutic theories, research, ethical standards, human diversity, and the range of human traditions (FACTBC, 2019, p.3). This project supplies a conference planning guide which will include information on funding sources, conference topics and themes, and a series of checklists and appendices that provide details of necessary steps for planning a conference. The theme for this conference is trauma informed care and I have incorporated five main principles (as developed by Fallot & Harris, 2006) of safety, trustworthiness, collaboration, empowerment, and choice into the overall structure and plan for the conference.

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)0.027
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.711
Threshold uncertainty score0.574

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.005
Science and technology studies0.0160.004
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0050.009
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0850.042

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 head0.149
GPT teacher head0.486
Teacher spread0.337 · 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
GenreOther

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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOccupational Therapy Practice and Research→French-language works237,207→