MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6992064286

Jefferson Makes a Major Contribution to Collaborating Across Borders, IV Conference

2013· article· en· W6992064286 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Medicine Forum · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicInterprofessional Education and Collaboration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAttendanceNova scotiaInterprofessional educationHealth careMultidisciplinary approach
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The fourth international Collaboration Across Borders conference (CAB IV) was held in Vancouver BC, Canada on June 12‐14, 2013. This conference, held every two years, attracts people involved in interprofessional education and care (IPEC) from across North America, and from other countries such as Japan, Australia and the European Union. The conference is a collaborative venture between the American Interprofessional Health Collaborative (AIHC) and the Canadian Interprofessional Health Collaborative (CIHC). The site of the conference alternates between the United States and Canada. As interest and involvement in interprofessional approaches to education and health care grows, so too does attendance at this meeting. The �irst conference, held at the University of Minnesota in 2007, attracted a little over 300 people. Subsequent meetings in Nova Scotia and Arizona saw attendance increase dramatically, reaching close to 750 in Arizona. This was the largest attendance ever at a conference devoted to interprofessional education. Attendance at the Vancouver conference exceeded that number.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.161

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.001
Scholarly communication0.0100.004
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0050.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0480.020

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.449
Teacher spread0.422 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Medicine ForumSame topicInterprofessional Education and CollaborationFrench-language works237,207