MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412554197 · doi:10.1007/s40271-025-00756-4

Prioritizing Participant and Research Team Emotional Safety During Data Generation and Analysis in Qualitative Patient-Reported Outcome Measure Research: Development of a Framework Informed by the GENDER-Q Youth Study

2025· review· en· W4412554197 on OpenAlex
Shelby Deibert, Susan M. Jack, Natasha Johnson, Jennifer Couturier, Charlene Rae, Anne F. Klassen

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.

Bibliographic record

VenuePatient · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicQualitative Research Methods and Ethics
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyOutcome (game theory)Qualitative researchMeasure (data warehouse)Applied psychologyComputer scienceSociologyData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.078
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.050
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.255
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0780.050
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.890
GPT teacher head0.678
Teacher spread0.212 · 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