MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410031188 · doi:10.1080/07325223.2025.2494510

Group supervision training to build team leads’ capacity: pilot program and preliminary evaluation - a brief report

2025· article· en· W4410031188 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Clinical Supervisor · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCounseling Practices and Supervision
Canadian institutionsThe King's UniversityWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTraining (meteorology)Pilot programPsychologyMedical educationGroup (periodic table)Program evaluationApplied psychologyMedicinePolitical scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Group supervision offers significant benefits but requires specialized training due to its complexity. We describe a pilot group supervision training program to meet 31 team leads’ acute needs in a Canadian community-based mental health and addiction organization. To evaluate training, we used a pre-post survey design with three-month follow-up focus group and the Kirkpatrick four-layer model. Preliminary results indicated high satisfaction with content/structure, learning of new knowledge/skills, some transfer of learning into practice, positive impact on group facilitation, and multiple organizational challenges. Findings highlight the necessity of designing specialized training collaboratively and providing organizational support to build team leads’ capacity.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.968
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.189
GPT teacher head0.458
Teacher spread0.269 · 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