MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1516946696 · doi:10.1108/14777271211220871

Mandatory reporting of healthcare associated infections

2012· article· en· W1516946696 on OpenAlex
Sam Sheps, David Birnbaum

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

VenueClinical Governance An International Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicAntibiotic Use and Resistance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic healthHealth carePublic relationsPolitical scienceMedicineMedical educationNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose This editorial aims to summarize major points from and explains the rationale of a symposium convened in Canada to explore whether American experience with mandatory public reporting of healthcare associated infection (HAI) information can usefully inform Canadian policy. Design/methodology/approach The symposium brought together members of the Universities Council, an interdisciplinary consortium of Canadian and American researchers organized by the Healthcare Associated Infections Program of the Washington State Health Department. Its members are interested in patient safety generally, and a comprehensive strategy to evaluate HAI public reporting specifically. Findings American health department experts shared insights from their experience with mandatory reporting; Canadian experts, primarily from the British Columbia Centre for Disease Control, described the current reporting policies of Canadian public health authorities. Presentations were discussed by an audience that included members of the public, allied health professionals, academic researchers, patient safety advocates, the British Columbia Ministry of Health as well as the Canadian Institute for Health Information. The American papers presented are published in this theme issue. Participants found the symposium to be a useful discussion of important issues that identified knowledge gaps underlying the role and value of public reporting in HAI prevention. Discussion of key research agenda issues was informed by the presentations and ensuing discussions. Practical implications The Universities Council research agenda was confirmed and further informed through the presentations and discussions, affording its members and others a better understanding of current needs and opportunities. Historical and state of the art descriptions of public reporting afforded comparisons of cultures, approaches and early results that can inform any policy makers contemplating relative merits of such programs. Originality/value Despite much start‐up activity in response to demands for more transparency, indications of consumer interest, and some early claims of success, there remain fundamental knowledge gaps and coordination problems hampering achievement of best approaches and value in public reporting. The group brought together in this symposium offers one of the most comprehensive perspectives available on current theory and practice.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.462

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.348 · 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