MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1899399295 · doi:10.4212/cjhp.v68i5.1481

Multiplicity of Terms Related to Patient Safety: A Hindrance to Progress

2015· article· en· W1899399295 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Marc M. Perreault

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPatient Safety and Medication Errors
Canadian institutionsMontreal General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPatient safetyHealth careMedicineNursingMedical emergencyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

o many terms related to safety, yet so little progress in this area over the years! Patient safety has become a major endeavour within virtually every health care setting, yet despite the efforts of every health care professional, patients continue to be at risk of adverse events as a result of direct care and processes of care. A new term is now starting to appear in the literature: patient safety incident. This term originates from the World Health Organization (WHO), which in 2004 set up the WHO Patient Safety program and the International Classification for

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)0.166
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.274
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.166
Threshold uncertainty score0.877

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1660.274
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0140.010
Science and technology studies0.0100.050
Scholarly communication0.0260.074
Open science0.0080.024
Research integrity0.0180.061
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.008

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.347 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Hospital PharmacySame topicPatient Safety and Medication ErrorsFrench-language works237,207