MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404807835 · doi:10.1370/afm.22.s1.6673

Modelling of intersectoral resources for people living with obesity: pilot study of an environmental analysis

2024· article· en· W4404807835 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Géraldine Layani, Maxime Sasseville, Laurence Berthelet, Nadia Sourial, Jean‐Baptiste Gartner, Lily Lessard, Mégane Pierre, André Côté, Alexandre A. Tremblay, Brigitte Vachon

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Annals of Family Medicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObesityEnvironmental healthGerontologyEnvironmental scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Context: Living with obesity is a complex, multifactorial health issue, and the healthcare system contributes only 20% of the factors affecting the health of a person living with obesity (PLO). Interventions dedicated to PLO need to be rethought according to an integrated, person-centred, and intersectoral approach to consider the complexity of living with obesity. Objective: To model the involvement of the different sectors and services mobilized in the follow-up of PLO in a region of Quebec. Study design: Qualitative study. An environmental scan was conducted between September 2023 and January 2024 using a literature review and semi-structured interviews. Setting: Regional County Municipality of Montmagny, semi-rural region (Chaudière-Appalaches), in Quebec, Canada. Study population: PLO, healthcare professionals and community workers. Intervention: A literature review was conducted to identify current and potential intersectoral interventions dedicated to PLO in Canada. This was followed by semi-structured interviews with a citizen partner, a health system manager, and a community worker to document their perspectives and implications and contextualize findings to the study region. Outcome measures: Qualitative data analysis was conducted deductively using the Health system Pineault framework and Network actor theory. Health resources modelling was carried out according to systems modelling principles. Results: Health professionals and community workers did not know, use, or coordinate all sectors of the community that may be involved in PLOs9 health. For social and organizational reasons, PLOs did not use many public health system resources, and private community resources were not coordinated with the public system. Conclusions: This pilot study shows that care and services dedicated to PLO are currently centred on the healthcare system. The resources available in the community are still little known to PLOs and healthcare professionals and are essentially served by the private system.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.471
Threshold uncertainty score0.937

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.641
GPT teacher head0.463
Teacher spread0.178 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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 venueThe Annals of Family MedicineSame topicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207