MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401077853 · doi:10.5014/ajot.2024.78s2-po241

Optimizing Collaboration Between OTs & Teachers in Inclusive Education: Key Considerations for a Joint Knowledge Translation Intervention

2024· article· en· W4401077853 on OpenAlexaff
Lina Ianni, Dana Anaby, Chantal Camden

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Occupational Therapy · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Accessibility for Disabilities
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKey (lock)Intervention (counseling)Knowledge translationTranslation (biology)Medical educationJoint (building)PsychologyMedicineComputer scienceKnowledge managementNursingEngineeringChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Date Presented 03/23/24 This presentation will highlight key considerations related to collaboration between OTs and teachers in inclusive education settings. These findings inform the development of a joint knowledge transfer training to optimize collaborative practices. Primary Author and Speaker: Lina Ianni Contributing Authors: Dana Anaby, Chantal Camden

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)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.057
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.160

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.057
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.003
Scholarly communication0.0090.010
Open science0.0020.017
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.171
GPT teacher head0.473
Teacher spread0.302 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Occupational TherapySame topicDigital Accessibility for DisabilitiesFrench-language works237,207