MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4244960522 · doi:10.1111/j.1600-0420.2006.00704.x

Book Review

2006· article· en· W4244960522 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Haraldur Sigurdsson

Notice bibliographique

RevueActa Ophthalmologica Scandinavica · 2006
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueMedical History and Innovations
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineOphthalmologyOptometry

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Peter K Leaver The History of Moorfields Eye Hospital: Forty Years On Volume III 348 pages RSM Press , Abingdon, Oxon , 2004 ISBN 185315 580 2 Price: £30.00 Moorfields Eye Hospital in London celebrated its bicentenary in 2005. It is a remarkable institution; it serves London on an everyday basis, provides consultative care nationwide and has served as a prominent global leader in ophthalmology for two centuries. However, at the same time it has managed to maintain its reputation for being friendly and accessible; it is a place that is easy and comfortable to visit. Previous histories of Moorfields were written by Treacher Collin (1929) and Frank Law (1975). The third volume, Forty Years On, published in 2004, is written by Dr Peter K. Leaver, a long-serving consultant in vitreoretinal surgery at Moorfields. During those 40 years enormous changes have taken place at Moorfields. In 1967 the hospital discharged 7400 patients from 345 beds; in 2000 it discharged 14 300 from 80 beds. There were 18 consultants employed at the hospital in the early 1960s; today there are more than 60 members of consulting staff. Attitudes have also changed: in the 1960s, writes Leaver, ‘consultants often behaved like gods, while hospital matrons were usually queenly figures’. The central message of the book for all of us who work in ophthalmology concerns not simply how patient care has evolved at Moorfields, but how the doctors at the hospital have led the major changes all the way! Many members of staff have been involved, but key players such as Professor Barrie R. Jones, Dr Noel Rice, Dr Robert Cooling and house governor John Atwill had the foresight, knowledge and energy that kept their thinking ahead of that of politicians and bureaucrats. There used to be two Moorfields hospitals in London, one on City Road and the other at High Holborn. There was also an academic institute at Judd Street. These were all united in one place, in 1988 and 1991, at City Road Hospital. At the time merging hospitals was not a popular practice; Moorfields was ahead of its time. It also took a lot of courage to transform the hospital from an ‘esoteric centre of excellence’ (and provider of tertiary care) into a centre of ophthalmic primary care for London. However, it is because of this that Moorfields Eye Hospital has survived as an independent and expanding institution, with an international paediatric eye centre now in preparation and opening next year. The research carried out at the Institute of Ophthalmology has scored consistently highly in international ratings since 1990. This book is divided into four parts. The first gives a general account of the development of the hospital. Part two contains a more detailed description of the clinical, nursing and clinical support services, describing each subspecialty in turn. Part three represents academe, divided into medical education and research. Finally, part four describes the organization of Moorfields, its management and administration, finance, fabric and infrastructure and the Moorfields Alumni Association. Peter Leaver's description of events is lively. His text is never dull and his accounts of the political battles fought convey the excitement of the times: you want to know how it all ends! The text is comprehensive and understandable, even for readers who do not know much about health politics in the UK. I enjoyed this book. Leaver writes a very readable text and his account is authenticated by the fact that he was there when it all happened. The book is flavoured with interesting and amusing anecdotes about everyday life in the hospital and illustrated with good colour photographs that depict longstanding doctors and support staff alike.

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Autre · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,566
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,848

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,1520,001

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,037
Tête enseignante GPT0,264
Écart entre enseignants0,227 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreAutre

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2006
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueActa Ophthalmologica ScandinavicaMême sujetMedical History and InnovationsTravaux en français237 207