Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The healthcare community is overwhelmed by torrents of information each and every day – some of it important, much of it not – and so a journal editor's role matters a great deal. The journal must, after all, make a difference. If the members of this community are to understand what is happening in healthcare and in society, and if they are presented with credible options and alternatives to respond, she will serve them well. If she can move them to action, she will be an inspiration. The right individual to take on the role of editor must be intelligent; well briefed about healthcare policy and practice; intimately familiar with data and information sources; linked directly to an international community of researchers, academics, payers, policy makers, managers and providers of care; and she will have a thorough understanding of the healthcare consumer. In addition to these credentials, she must be a leader, or no one will follow her. Finally, she must be highly organized in order to deal with the many proposals, manuscripts and reviews that cross her desk. A tall order. Allow me to introduce Dr. Jennifer Zelmer. Her current focus is the use of health systems performance data to make international comparisons. She is CEO of the International Health Terminology Standards Development Organisation (IHTSDO), based in Copenhagen. Previously, she was vice president for research and analysis at the Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI), where she initiated and oversaw an integrated program of analytical activities, including leading teams responsible for developing CIHI's annual report on healthcare in Canada. Prior to joining CIHI, she worked with a variety of health, academic and governmental organizations in Canada, Australia, Denmark and India, among other countries. She has also held such positions as adjunct lecturer at the University of Toronto and research associate with the Research Institute for Quantitative Studies in Economics and Population at McMaster University. Currently, she is a member of several health-related boards and advisory committees. She has a bachelor's degree in health information science and a doctorate in economics from McMaster University. Good currency. When Zelmer took her current position, Richard Alvarez, president and CEO of Canada Health Infoway, remarked that she “is a young, dynamic and talented professional who will bring vision, passion and energy to the development and establishment of IHTSDO. Canada's loss is truly the International Standards community's gain!” She was selected for this position based on her impressive track record of working in an international and political environment, and her extensive experience in successfully leading and motivating teams within a new organization. You will also want to hear from her mentor – Denis Protti, founder of the University of Victoria's School of Health Information Science. I have known Jennifer for over 15 years. Our first meeting was memorable. She came for an interview to enter our school. After conducting herself very well, she left the room as my colleagues and I completed our assessment forms. I opened the discussion with the comment that she was, in my opinion, an ideal and outstanding candidate. All agreed – there was really no need for any discussion. Faculty and students alike were constantly amazed how she could perform at such a high intellectual level – someone who is bright, personable and a doer. The Canadian healthcare system and the field of health informatics has been the lucky party. She could have gone into any other sector and been a star. Longwoods is honoured to support Jennifer Zelmer as she shares her talent and insight through the pages of Healthcare Policy. We welcome our new Editor-in-Chief.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,005 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,004 | 0,007 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,004 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».