MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413358431 · doi:10.5334/ijic.nacic24050

Creating Third Sector Collaborations

2025· article· en· W4413358431 on OpenAlexaffabout
Isabel Henderson, Richard Lewanczuk

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Integrated Care · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCommunity Health and Development
Canadian institutionsAlberta Health Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessProcess managementKnowledge managementComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Focusing on factors affecting the physical, mental and social well-being of Albertans (including vulnerable populations), the Health and Wellness Volunteer Sector Associates Forum was established in 209 to exchange information and ideas that advance the health and wellness of all Albertans, with a focus on health equity. Approach: The Forum brings people, ideas, and information together to build collaborative approaches to services, supports and circumstances affecting Albertans who wish to thrive in their communities. The Forum also provides the opportunity to network, learn and engage in impactful cross-sector conversations to address issues and challenges, new service delivery models, as well as policies and systems changes impacting Albertans.The Forum has been established as an equal partnership between all members. It serves to provide advice and information to Alberta Health Services (AHS) to enable AHS to better meet the needs of communities and citizens. Conversely, AHS provides information to the members in order to help support the member organizations best serve the needs of their clients. The focus of the meetings is ) to identify issues related to the quality of life of Albertans and the achievement of health equity and discuss possible ways to address them; 2) present information and updates on relevant initiatives led by members of the Forum; 3) identify areas for potential collaboration or coordination; 4) identify key health and wellness issues faced by Alberta communities; 5) identify best practices and innovative approaches being used locally and in other jurisdictions; 6) share information on upcoming events and opportunities to learn, network and advise on important community issues and opportunities. Membership is broad and includes Volunteer Alberta, 2 Alberta, Alberta Blue Cross, Caregivers Alberta, AHS - Health System Integration, AHS - Provincial Seniors and Continuing Care, Healthy Aging Alberta, Drive Happiness Seniors Assisted Transportation, Rotary Districts 5360 and 5370, Calgary United Way, Canadian Red Cross. Meetings are held virtually on a monthly basis. Agendas are typically informal with multiple opportunities to reflect, ponder, imagine and plan. Members find out about recent news, activities, and collaborations from Alberta network of health and wellness-serving organizations. Implications: Since its inception, areas which have been addressed have been varied and have included: COVID-9 updates and strategies to support Albertans to live safely in the community; a discussion on Alberta Wildfires and proactive safety measures for community members; alerts regarding upcoming webinars, learning opportunities and training programs; opportunities to recognize community volunteers; time to discuss family caregivers and opportunities to support them; space to share updates on granting options; time to provide input into key planning/strategy documents; and time for collective support of individual member initiatives. Results: The Forum provides a virtual hub to connect members with others working in this space - linking them to helpful information, activities, and resources as well as opportunities to problem-solve around current complexities and changes in the health and social service delivery systems. We emphasize innovation and creativity, and seek out examples of transformational change within the Third Sector environment.

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)0.052
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score0.273

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0520.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0180.006
Scholarly communication0.0220.014
Open science0.0040.050
Research integrity0.0060.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0780.018

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.392 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Integrated CareSame topicCommunity Health and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207