MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7118093123 · doi:10.1093/geroni/igaf122.623

Using a Structured Environmental Assessment Tool of Inform Change Under Constraints: Action Marguerite

2025· article· en· W7118093123 on OpenAlexaff
Robert Wrublowsky, Migette L. Kaup

Bibliographic record

VenueInnovation in Aging · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes
Canadian institutionsResearch Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUsabilityIdentification (biology)Psychological interventionAction (physics)Process (computing)Scale (ratio)Session (web analytics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract One goal of the EASE is to assist care providers who have older, traditional buildings determine how to best utilize scarce resources when considering renovations that will have the most positive impact on residents, families and staff. Analysis of differences between settings that clearly reflect traditional design elements (long, double loaded corridors and minimal space for meaningful social engagement) and settings that have adopted some person-centered care values identify smaller scale and the presence of a functional kitchen as key factors. Both of these involve significant operational as well as environmental changes and can be met with resistance. This session describes the process of working with a care provider that had seven highly traditional living areas assessed with the EASE which resulted in identification of specific recommendations to reduce the size of living areas and include functional kitchens. The evidence-based nature of the EASE supports constructive responses to perceived barriers to adoption of changes that require operational changes. The EASE also identifies numerous low-cost interventions that can be easily adopted allowing for a phased implementation process.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.450
Teacher spread0.342 · 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 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInnovation in AgingSame topicGeriatric Care and Nursing HomesFrench-language works237,207