MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W67924880

Development of Quality of Life by Application Sufficiency Economy and Ottawa Charter Case Study: Kukot Sub-district, Lamlukka District, Pathumtani Province

2012· article· th· W67924880 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Srimuang Parangrit

Bibliographic record

Venueวารสารพยาบาลศาสตร์และสุขภาพ (Journal of Nursing Science and Health) · 2012
Typearticle
Languageth
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDiverse Scientific Research Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCharterNonprobability samplingQuality of life (healthcare)Quality (philosophy)Participatory action researchPublic relationsPolitical scienceEconomic growthBusinessSociologyPsychologyLawEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objectives of the Participatory Action Research (PAR) were focused on assessing quality of life ofthe citizenry, identifying factors affecting their quality of life and the best approach to its overall improvementthrough principle of Sufficiency Economy and Ottawa Charter. Purposive-sampling area was selected, withsampling group comprising a community leader and other interested community members. Data was compiledfrom three focused group discussions. Stage was then set for identification, analysis and prioritization of still-existing problems and unfulfilled needs of the community. Workshop was organized to devise and write out aplan of action, implement it and evaluate results through content analysis of the data. Results, the quality of life in the community under study was less than truly good, possibly because offailed expectations in utility services and interrelationships among community members. Nonetheless, thecommunity was developing. Factors affecting their quality of life included sense of camaraderie, companionshipof a pet, playgrounds, environment and stress. As for improving their quality of life by means of SufficiencyEconomy and Ottawa Charter, the community started program of recreational sports, which helped forge bondsof community friendship, preventing them from drugs and toward better state of health and wellness. There wasreal hope for improved quality of life.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.551
Threshold uncertainty score0.902

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.178
GPT teacher head0.479
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueวารสารพยาบาลศาสตร์และสุขภาพ (Journal of Nursing Science and Health)Same topicDiverse Scientific Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207