MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400675364 · doi:10.61093/sec.8(2).64-87.2024

Agile Methods in the Social Work: Research Landscape Analysis

2024· article· en· W4400675364 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueSocioEconomic Challenges · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Innovations and Challenges
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubject (documents)Data scienceManifestoComputer scienceThematic analysisWork (physics)Tag cloudAgile software developmentThematic mapField (mathematics)SociologySocial scienceWorld Wide WebQualitative researchPolitical scienceGeographyVisualizationData miningEngineeringLawCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of flexible methods in social work allows social workers to be more flexible, client-oriented, adaptive and responsive in a dynamic environment, respond to changes faster, achieve better social impact results, and be more coordinated in cooperation with other professionals. The article demonstrates the results of descriptive bibliometric analysis and scientific mapping (using the Biblioshiny software) of more than 750 articles and monographs indexed by Scopus. Since the appearance of the first study in 1969 and until 2000, this topic was almost not the focus of scientists; the year 2000 was determined using Reference Publication Year Spectroscopy as the key date of interest growth (the year preceding the appearance of the Manifesto for Agile Software development), since 2001, the number of publications on this topic has grown exponentially. By a Sankey plot, interdependence between top references, top authors and top keywords was summarized. According to Bradford’s law, scientific journals are structured according to the contribution to the dissemination of knowledge in the subject area. Scientists from the USA, Great Britain, China, Australia and Canada have scientific leadership in this field. The TOP-10 global and local cited documents were analyzed in detail, and “occasional” and “sore” authors were distinguished according to Lotka’s law. The most popular thematic research areas on applying flexible methods in social work are presented in visual design as a word cloud (tag cloud, weighted list) and a treemap. The analysis proved that keywords across various clusters and research sub-themes are closely interconnected. The most relevant and advanced research categories were identified by analyzing the increase in relevance and the level of subject development, as well as their trends over time. A trend toward convergence in scientific research thematic progression in scholarly literature was explored using an alluvial diagram (a longitudinal thematic map). Constructed maps of relevance degree and development degree of subtopic in documents with a focus on agile or adaptive social work methods made it possible to determine niche, emerging, and declining topics.

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.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.817
Threshold uncertainty score0.332

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.215
GPT teacher head0.489
Teacher spread0.274 · 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