MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6888951768 · doi:10.25384/sage.24202111

Supplemental Material - Community Engagement in Research: An Updated Systematic Review of Quantitative Engagement Measurement Scales for Health Studies

2023· article· en· W6888951768 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueSage Journals Data · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCommunity Health and Development
Canadian institutionsPublic Health Agency of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommunity engagementScale (ratio)Public engagementCommunity healthSystematic reviewCommunity studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Supplemental Material for Community Engagement in Research: An Updated Systematic Review of Quantitative Engagement Measurement Scales for Health Studies by Barbara Gordon, Kristin M. Van De Griend, Victoria L. Scharp, Hannah Ellis, and Mary A. Nies in Evaluation & the Health Professions

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.143
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score0.813

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.143
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0150.021
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.4300.028

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 head0.886
GPT teacher head0.664
Teacher spread0.222 · 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.

Study designSystematic review
DomainMethods
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSage Journals DataSame topicCommunity Health and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207