MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

From “Grey Literature” to “Specialized Resources”: Rethinking Terminology to Enhance Grey Literature Access and Use

2020· article· en· W6908601600 on OpenAlex

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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueGreyNet International · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicOptics and Image Analysis
Canadian institutionsGreo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerminologyGrey literatureStakeholderResource (disambiguation)Interface (matter)Knowledge translationDigital libraryOrder (exchange)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gambling Research Exchange (GREO) is an independent Knowledge Translation and Exchange (KTE) organization that aims to reduce harm from gambling. GREO curates and maintains a digital library of credible gambling information, most of which is grey literature. Several stakeholder groups use this library, including policy makers, researchers, treatment providers, regulators, and gambling operators. In order to meet knowledge needs, GREO both manages and produces grey literature, and maintains a research data repository for use by the gambling studies community. In keeping with the Open Science movement, the goal of the library is to provide timely and relevant evidence in formats accessible to diverse audiences, which can be used to inform decision-making, research, treatment, and policy direction. This paper documents how GREO’s digital library reorganized its search interface and document types and adopted accessible terminology so that complex research findings could extend beyond the academic community to broader audiences. Beginning in 2017, we assessed the existing library’s terminology and document types for accessibility and credibility. The first step was to rename the library from “Knowledge Repository” to “Evidence Centre”, a term that resonated more with non-academic audiences. Similarly, in 2018, we renamed the “Grey Literature” collection to “Specialized Resources” so that it is readily understood. Since the collection had grown considerably, we divided the single “Grey Literature” resource type into ten searchable categories to help direct users to the most appropriate resource formats. Examples include white papers, reports, visual tools, and instructional resources. A recent change in our funding model necessitated a further transition from a focus on Ontario, Canada to international audiences. Using examples drawn from a recent focus on gambling in Great Britain, this paper demonstrates how the GREO Evidence Centre has become increasingly accessible to wider audiences since 2017 to more effectively address their information needs.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.481
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.259 · 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