MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6963833134 · doi:10.25384/sage.13050035

Gerontechnology_Supplementary_Figure_1_Revised_30-06-2020 – Supplemental material for Canadian Occupational Therapists’ Use of Technology With Older Adults: A Nationwide Survey

2020· article· en· W6963833134 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueSage Journals Data · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAssistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMEDLINENational Health Interview SurveySurvey researchCurrent Population Survey

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Supplemental material, Gerontechnology_Supplementary_Figure_1_Revised_30-06-2020 for Canadian Occupational Therapists’ Use of Technology With Older Adults: A Nationwide Survey by Aline Aboujaoudé, Nathalie Bier, Maxime Lussier, Christine Ménard, Mélanie Couture, Louise Demers, Claudine Auger, Hélène Pigot, Martin Caouette, Dany Lussier-Desrochers and Patricia Belchior in OTJR: Occupation, Participation and Health

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)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.688
Threshold uncertainty score0.445

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.010
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.6880.205

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 head0.139
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSage Journals DataSame topicAssistive Technology in Communication and MobilityFrench-language works237,207