MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W574506640

Overcoming Loss: Activities and Stories to Help Transform Children's Grief and Loss

2008· book· en· W574506640 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Julia Sorensen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFeelingVocabularyReading (process)PsychologySentenceSocial psychologyLinguisticsComputer scienceArtificial intelligence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction. How to use this workbook. PART I: Expressive activities : Feelings. Activity 1 - Creating a safe place to be...: An introduction to feeling work. Activity 2 - Feeling puzzle: What are the names of your feelings? Activity 3 - Match the feeling game: Recognizing your feelings. Activity 4 - Faces collage: Learning what emotions are expressed on faces. Activity 5 - Feeling faces: Draw a face to match the feeling word. Activity 6 - Feeling words: Building a vocabulary of feeling words. Activity 7 - Finish the sentence...: Choose a feeling word from the vocabulary list to end these sentences. Activity 8 - What color are my feelings? Find out what color your feelings are. Activity 9 - Feelings rainbow: Expressing your feelings through colors. PART II: Expressive activities: Identifying everyday losses. Activity 10 - Saying goodbye is hard to do: Learning about everyday closures. Activity 11 - Talking about losses of pets or toys: Recognizing, talking about, and drawing pet or toy losses. Activity 12 - Good memories: Gathering memories. Activity 13 - Memory boxes: A place to honor. Activity 14 - New perspectives: A new way to remember and feel. PART III: Approaching the loss experience through fiction. Activity 15 - Story time: Lilly has to say goodbye PART IV: Creating Groups: Four-week curriculum. Tools and templates: Appendix A: Cover page to be used if exercises are to be made into a personalized book. Appendix B: Feelings vocabulary list. Appendix C: US, Canadian, UK and EU resources international web resources. Appendix D: Recommended reading. Appendix E: Handouts A1-A4. Appendix F: Group screening questionnaire and group evaluation activity. About the author.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.165
Threshold uncertainty score0.554

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1650.075

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.278 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations2
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental Health→French-language works237,207→