MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6962789310 · doi:10.17605/osf.io/raf9p

Deciding to Visit a Rapid Access Addictions Medicine (RAAM) Clinic in Canada: Perspectives from People Living with an Alcohol Use Problem in a Modified eDelphi Survey (Research Expectations and Analysis Plan Registration)

2023· other· en· W6962789310 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Science Framework · 2023
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDelphi Technique in Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAddiction medicinePlan (archaeology)AddictionData collectionMEDLINEAlcohol addiction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current registration outlines our research expectations and plans for data analysis. The data that we will be exploring was collected for an e-Delphi, consensus making survey where participants/panelists experiencing problems with alcohol indicated how important or not important certain aspects of care were to their decision to visit a Rapid Access Addiction Medicine (RAAM) clinic in Canada. To better understand how different people ranked the items in the e-Delphi, we will analyze participant characteristics against responses.

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 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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Bibliometrics, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.381
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.025
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0040.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.363
GPT teacher head0.534
Teacher spread0.170 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Science FrameworkSame topicDelphi Technique in ResearchFrench-language works237,207