MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400695240 · doi:10.3389/fresc.2024.1340881

Bone health education in individuals with spinal cord injury or disease—the Bare Bones Podcast Series: plan it, produce it, post it!

2024· article· en· W4400695240 on OpenAlexafffund
B. Catharine Craven, Anita Kaiser, Lindsie A. Blencowe, Hope Jervis-Rademeyer, Lynn Boag, Wendy Murphy, Masae Miyatani

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Rehabilitation Sciences · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Media in Health Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity Health Network FoundationParalyzed Veterans of America
KeywordsSpinal cord injuryMedicineGuidelineMedical educationPsychologySpinal cordPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: The Consortium for Spinal Cord Medicine's inaugural Clinical Practice Guideline for Bone Health and Osteoporosis Management for Individuals with Spinal Cord Injury or Disease (CSCM-CPG) was published in 2022 for a clinician audience. The aim of this project was to develop a podcast series to ensure people with lived experience with Spinal Cord Injury or Disease (PLEX) understand the CSCM-CPG content and know how to act to reduce their fracture risk. Methods: The "Bare Bones Podcast Series" consists of nine episodes; one related to each CSCM-CPG chapter. The podcast content and the questions asked in each podcast were co-developed by PLEX partners (PLEX-P) and the project team. Two PLEX-P acted as co-hosts for the series. The invited speaker(s) were CSCM-CPG expert panel members who participated in an informal dialogue with the hosts. Each podcast closes with a specific action a listener can do to advance their bone health. The related Educational Action Planning Tool (EAT) handouts contain text and infographic information specific to each podcast episode and include key concepts and a specific actionable take-home message. Local PLEX reviewers (PLEX-R) were invited to review podcast episodes and EATs and provide their feedback through focus group participation or one-on-one (1:1) interviews. The project team revised the podcast episodes and the EATs based on feedback from the PLEX-R prior to releasing them online. Results: Nine podcast episodes and related EATs were designed and created collaboratively with 3 PLEX-P, 22 PLEX-R, 11 CSCM-CPG expert panel members, and the project team. The episodes were titled: "Introduction to the Bare Bones of Bone Health"; "Fracture 101"; "Blood Tests-a Window into You"; "I See Your Skeleton"; "Vitamin D for all, Calcium for Some"; "Get Moving and Loading"; "Pills or Poisons & Atomic Habits"; "Snap and Crack"; and "Directions for Research". The Bare Bones Podcast Series was shared through the project website. Conclusions: The podcasts will aid PLEX and their family caregivers to advocate for ongoing bone health assessments and to promote an ongoing dialogue with care team members regarding how to prevent fractures and fracture-related morbidity and mortality.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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 score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.091

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0270.005

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.369 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Rehabilitation SciencesSame topicSocial Media in Health EducationFrench-language works237,207