MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1937122842 · doi:10.5334/ijic.2246

PRISMA: Program of Research to Integrate the Services for the Maintenance of Autonomy. A system-level integration model in Quebec

2015· article· en· W1937122842 on OpenAlex

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

VenueInternational Journal of Integrated Care · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Systems and Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntegrated careAutonomyAcronymProcess managementIncentiveHealth careBusinessNursingKnowledge managementOperations managementEngineering managementMedicineComputer scienceEngineeringPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Program of Research to Integrate the Services for the Maintenance of Autonomy (PRISMA) began in Quebec in 1999. Evaluation results indicated that the PRISMA Project improved the system of care for the frail elderly at no additional cost. In 2001, the Quebec Ministry of Health and Social Services made implementing the six features of the PRISMA approach a province-wide goal in the programme now known as RSIPA (French acronym). Extensive Province-wide progress has been made since then, but ongoing challenges include reducing unmet need for case management and home care services, creating incentives for increased physician participation in care planning and improving the computerized client chart, among others. PRISMA is the only evaluated international model of a coordination approach to integration and one of the few, if not the only, integration model to have been adopted at the system level by policy-makers.

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)0.008
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.407
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.258
GPT teacher head0.544
Teacher spread0.286 · 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