MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7033775592

Self-report and performance measures differ in their association with home care use : an exploratory study

2008· dissertation· en· W7033775592 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

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2008
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpacecraft Dynamics and Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExploratory researchAssociation (psychology)Measure (data warehouse)Health careLong-term careActivities of daily livingMEDLINE
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Functional status measures are used extensively to determine the home care needs and eligibility of older adults.However, it is unclear what type of functional status measure is best for these objectives.The purpose of this secondary analysis of the 2001 Aging in Manitoba t ongitudinal Study survey and linked Manitoba Health administrative data was to investigate the concurrent and longitudinl relationship between three different measures of functional status and the formal home care use of older Manitobans.Analysis was structured with the Andersen-Newman Framework of Health Services Utilization (1973) as a guide.ln these small exploratory study results, the self-report of capacity measure appeared most associated with home care use cross-sectionally, while the performance measure was best able to predict home care use two and a half years following the functional status assessment.Results emphasize that different types of functional status measures are not interchangeable.......

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.648
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.162
Teacher spread0.154 · 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